March 15th, 2012
04:55 PM ET

'Red Deer Cave' people, possibly a new human species?

Newly identified partial skeletons of "mysterious humans" excavated at two caves in southwest China display an unique mix of primitive and modern anatomical features, scientists say.

"Their skulls are anatomically unique. They look very different to all modern humans, whether alive today or in Africa 150,000 years ago," said evolutionary biologist Darren Curnoe, the lead author of the study, from the University of New South Wales in Australia.

The fossils found at excavation sites in Longlin Cave, in Guangxi Province, and the Maludong Cave, in Yunnan Province, indicate that the stone-aged people had short, flat faces and lacked a modern chin. They had thick skull bones, a rounded brain case, prominent brow ridges and a moderate-size brain.

They were dubbed the "Red Deer Cave" people because scientists say these prehistoric people hunted extinct red deer and cooked them in the cave at Maludong, where four of the five partial skeletal fossils were found.

Whether the Red Deer Cave people are indeed a new species indicating a new evolutionary line or whether they are a very early population of modern humans remains a controversial topic of discussion among scientists.

The team of Australian and Chinese researchers remains cautiously optimistic when it comes to classifying what they have unearthed.

"The evidence is quite fairly balanced at the moment. It's weighted towards the idea that the Red Deer Cave people might represent a new population, possibly a new species," Curnoe said.

Details of the discovery are published in the scientific journal PLoS ONE.

Archeological evidence dates these prehistoric hunters and gatherers to 14,500 to 11,500 years ago, indicating that for a sliver of time in East Asia, the Red Deer Cave people may have shared the landscape with modern-looking people who displayed the beginnings of farming.

Despite Asia being the largest subcontinent, the fossil record for human evolution remains slim. The vast majority of prehistoric archeology has focused on Europe and Africa, scientists say.

"Understanding the fossil records of East Asia is the missing link to our overall understanding of human evolution," Curnoe said.

The Maludong site had actually been excavated the first time by the Chinese in 1989. At that time, several bags of fossils were found, but it was only in 2008 that the site was studied and the remains analyzed by Curnoe and his team of researchers.

The age of the cave sites was determined by collecting sediment samples and tested using radioactive carbon dating.

At the Longlin Cave, the remains of a lower jaw set in a bed of sediment were found by a geologist back in 1979 and rediscovered in a the basement laboratory of one of the Chinese researchers in 2009. The bones first had to be removed from the sediment rock. Then, using a CT Scan 3D, models of the skull were made, showing both the prominent primitive and modern features.

Due to the uncertainty surrounding the human fossil record, paleoanthropologists say, more conclusive DNA testing is required.

Initial DNA testing conducted on the fossils did not show evidence of human DNA, but Curnoe and his team will push forward.

"If we are successful in extracting DNA, it will give us a really accurate understanding of precisely who these people are and where they might fit in the human evolutionary tree," he said.

"We are trying to understand the common story. What unites us all? Where do we come from? In understanding our evolutionary past, this might help us understand where we are today and where we might be going," Curnoe added.

Follow @CNNLightYears on Twitter

soundoff (942 Responses)
  1. ernesto

    i see people walking around everywhere that look this guy, just as stupid too. it's really george w.bush right!

    March 15, 2012 at 7:43 pm |
    • George

      Yeah I think he just moved in next door to me. Or maybe it was of the other 30 million people that look just like him

      March 15, 2012 at 7:50 pm |
      • gstlab3

        I THINK WE ARE ALL DIFFERING DEGREES OF A SIMIULAR ANIMAL

        NOT THE EXACT SAME SPECIES.

        IF YOUR ANCESTORS CAME FROM ONE CONTINENT THEY ARE DIFFERANT THAN THOSE FROM ANOTHER.

        THE RACES AND THE CULTURES ARE JUST TIPS OF THE ICEBURG.

        THE COMMON ANCESTOR IS A MYTH IN MY BOOK.

        NO WAY IN HELL AM I RELATED TO THOSE STONE AGE PEOPLE STILL LIVING TODAY IN AFRICA OR IN CHINA OR SOUTHEAST ASIA., INDIA OR SOUTH AMERICA.

        WE EVOLVED UNTOLD YEARS AGO OR MAYBE EVEN EVOLVED SEPARATELY AT DIFFERENT TIMES.

        THAT EXPLAINS WHY SOME PEOPLE ARE STILL LIVING IN THE STONE AGE WHILE THE REST OF THE WORLD MOVED ON.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:56 pm |
      • Jackie Treehorn

        Hey gstlab, your delusional all-caps ramble about being a member of the master race would be more convincing if you didn't spell every other word wrong. Pathetic.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:11 pm |
      • dakooj

        Hey gstlab3....

        Why don't you keep your uneducated, racist, ridiculous ideas to yourself? The scientific evidence of our relationship to each other is made at the genetic level. That's right...DNA...amazing stuff right? Read a book and fix your CAPS LOCK on your PC please.

        Thank you.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
      • juan

        who cares we all gonna die on december anyway

        March 15, 2012 at 10:55 pm |
      • Mslmao

        Shut up!

        March 15, 2012 at 11:59 pm |
      • Mslmao

        Shut up directed to "george" and Juan your statement is SO funny!

        March 16, 2012 at 12:02 am |
      • bill the greek

        Are they Greek-Orthodox, Jewish, or Moslems? It is important to know this. Did they have a mullah, rabbi or priest.?

        March 16, 2012 at 12:28 am |
      • John

        For gstlab3: You would be very happy to see what these smart scientists called "primatologists" have found out gstab3! A trained ape can read and write using many, many words. They can tell us when they are hungry or tired or want a hug. These very, very smart apes write messages and stories that sound just like yours. Maybe you can visit your ape relatives someday if you can get a ride. They can give you a hug if you like but make sure you wash your hands afterwards! They like using the big letters, too.

        March 16, 2012 at 2:04 am |
      • RabeWolf515

        Uhhhh, if you are in fact a member of any of the Northern European ethnic groups, gstlab3, then you must realize that your very language (woeful misspellings aside) descends from the same Indo-European (formerly known as Indo-Aryan) root language as Sanskrit and Farsi, so you are to some degree definitely related to some of the Asiatic Untermenschen you decry in your pitiful response. There are further cognates between the linguistically-reconstructed Proto-Indo-European languages and the Proto-Semitic root languages, so you're also likely related to Jews and Arabs. Additionally, with the advances in DNA research we can trace all human beings back to Africa. These are facts.

        Let me know when you find the fossilized human riding his fossilized dinosaur. Guh.

        March 16, 2012 at 3:29 am |
      • Leif

        @gstlab3 Could you define "simular"? Don't tell me it is a typo. "U" and "A" are not next to each other on the keyboard.

        March 16, 2012 at 5:37 am |
      • good one

        not looser resc

        March 16, 2012 at 6:01 am |
      • Sadiqmanzan

        Hey gstlab3, you must be brain dead. How pathetic... get help, if you can.

        March 16, 2012 at 6:45 am |
      • reason

        It is interesting how after reading religious scripture you get the impression God created one human species a few thousand years ago. Yet through science we know there have been dozens of human species over millions of years.

        If religious scripture is the word of an all knowing god why does religion perfectly reflect the incredibly narrow views and limited knowledge of a stone-age society?

        March 16, 2012 at 7:13 am |
      • Teacher

        Reason,

        A while back I overheard a conversation between two of my friends. One of them is very religious and the other is very not. A question similar to yours was asked and my religious friend responded by saying that God hid dinosaur fossils to trick us.

        March 16, 2012 at 7:31 am |
      • fimeilleur

        @Teacher,

        I guess your version of god is deceitful then?

        March 16, 2012 at 9:13 am |
      • Tyler

        Blatent racism. Well done, sir.

        March 16, 2012 at 3:34 pm |
    • Derrick

      LMBAO ernesto

      March 15, 2012 at 8:10 pm |
    • Norm

      Naw, he looks like a Nantuckett whaling man.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:00 pm |
    • JudicialPersonnel

      Why are they showing a picture of my crooked ignorant and arrogant family court magistrate? A dead ringer.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:16 pm |
    • sleepy

      Description sounds like Peyton Manning to me.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:22 pm |
      • Mslmao

        NOT Thumbs down not funny! Go back to sleep

        March 16, 2012 at 12:03 am |
    • Reggie

      That is Fred Stanford! Standford & Sons

      March 15, 2012 at 9:29 pm |
      • sleepy

        Inscribed on the walls. "Oh, this is the biggest one I ever had. You hear that Elizabeth? I'm coming to join you honey. " and "I'm calling you ugly, I could push your face in some dough and make gorilla cookies. "
        -FS

        March 15, 2012 at 9:36 pm |
      • lance corporal

        sanford, stanford is a univ

        March 16, 2012 at 12:49 am |
      • RMHC

        Learn to spell before you put someone down please!!!

        March 16, 2012 at 7:26 am |
    • kathy

      tee hee

      March 15, 2012 at 9:36 pm |
      • Mslmao

        Tee hee? lol FUNNY!

        March 16, 2012 at 12:06 am |
    • Yetty

      All I know is that God Almighty created every human being on earth planet.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:15 pm |
      • mickey1313

        what you "know" is souly an openion, and one that is suported by zero facts.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:41 pm |
      • Duncan

        Honestly, I sometimes wonder which should worry me more about the state of our species; the original ignorant comment by a science-fearing rube, or the moronic reply from someone smart enough to know better, but foolish enough to riddle his post full of obvious spelling mistakes.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:22 pm |
      • sam stone

        that's ALL you know? pretty sad.

        March 16, 2012 at 5:29 am |
      • H Manuel Montes

        So that's where Obama's brother has been living!

        March 16, 2012 at 5:57 am |
      • Darwin aka god

        You are right i did create everyone.

        March 16, 2012 at 7:17 am |
      • RMHC

        Why do people try to slam someones belief, but can't spell worth a darn???

        March 16, 2012 at 7:27 am |
      • FifthApe

        Which god would that be?

        March 16, 2012 at 8:32 am |
      • Erin

        Since you have such faith (no pun intended) in a book written by men, about men, and for men (take some recreational drugs and tell me about divine inspiration), I have a few questions.

        1. Who did Cain and Abel marry?

        2. Where did all those people in the land of Nod come from?

        3. If everyone was a child of Adam and Eve, why would Cain need a special mark to keep from being killed by strangers? Wouldn't his own brothers and sisters have known who he was?

        I have asked various representatives of several different religious affiiliations these questions and have yet to get a satisfactory answer. A Catholic priest went so far as to say that Cain and Abel had marries their sisters, but "Did not have time." to discuss the rest.

        March 19, 2012 at 7:36 pm |
    • tcortes

      Looks more like the current out going Pres. than it does George.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:40 pm |
      • Palin 2112

        You might want to take a closer look at the pic and watch the news.
        I believe you are wrong on both counts.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:01 pm |
      • Bobo

        Correct on both counts.

        March 16, 2012 at 1:21 am |
    • Mark

      I dunno...shave that beard and he looks like Obama. He probably doesn't have a birth certificate either...

      March 15, 2012 at 10:48 pm |
      • Teresa

        I have a certificate of live birth, does that mean I don't have a birth certificate too? Funny it's worked for me for 50 odd years and no one ever questioned it.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:00 pm |
      • sam stone

        ....and of course some genius makes this about politics

        March 16, 2012 at 5:32 am |
    • Ed

      Your thinking of George Jefferson

      March 15, 2012 at 10:56 pm |
    • Bob

      Which version of the Bible? Most peoplem apparently do not realize that there are currently 37 different, English bibles used In the Woeld today. The books that are included or excluded, vary greatly. Treating the versions, and their interrupt actions of words written in ancient Greek and other languages, never mind the books that were simply excluded by the books used today is foolish, at best.
      Scientific theory is based on observed, supported FACTS. Check the definition. A scientific theory is not simply a good idea that someone has, but has to pass a strict examination of supporting data. The bibles are supported by belief, not facts, or any theory. It explained what man observed..but was not necessary correct. the sun revolved around the Earth, God made man (not sure about woman) in one place, but fact shows man developed around the same time, at many places and in many different images.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:23 pm |
      • Mslmao

        Blah blah blah Blob Blob Blob! 5 words Blob lol

        March 16, 2012 at 12:14 am |
      • Crystal

        I think it is unfair to announce that there are 37 different versions of the Bible without the explanation of why. There are valid reasons for this and there are VERY important reasons why some books were excluded. It is not a balanced argument, it's very misleading to say that the Bible isn't accurate because there are so many versions. Translations would be a more accurate term. It goes so much deeper than what you stated.

        March 16, 2012 at 1:51 am |
      • WASP

        @crystal: i have only one question between those 37 books, which is correct? and why does the word of god need to be interrpted differently 37 times? if it is the word of god then it should translate to the modern language with only one interrptation......unless man has the power to change god's meanings. another thing, why were any of the books left out? maybe one of those books left out is an important part god wanted in the bible?

        March 16, 2012 at 7:22 am |
    • loverspoint

      This guy had a great barber and was well groomed. Common you could have made him have one hair out of place.

      March 16, 2012 at 12:20 am |
      • simple simon

        LOL – Did they find an electric trimmer?

        March 16, 2012 at 11:32 am |
    • JFB

      O! Darwin!!!

      March 16, 2012 at 2:10 am |
    • dingopoo

      Why is he black? This is racist. Thats not my culture n heritage! The go n say we come from monkeys

      March 16, 2012 at 5:33 am |
    • Sam

      Ridiculous the word of God is the truth to believe that science explains everything is completely bogus yet we are the only proof of life that exists in the whole universe and that tells me that we were put here for a reason the bring praise to our God to say that science is everything is very selfish and blasphemous because yet the universe tells that of what power our father in heaven has may God have mercy on the people who don't believe in God

      March 16, 2012 at 5:53 am |
      • H Manuel Montes

        And the earth is only 6,000 years old and Noah picked up 2 of each bug and beetle in the world before he floated away and also ran aground like the cruise ship. Give me a break, I believe in Thor and Zeus, makes about as much sense-GOD WILLING-how many died after hearing that phrase?

        March 16, 2012 at 6:03 am |
      • Darwin

        Go hump the bible. Religion is the biggest waste of time. All you bible pushers are freakin ignorant.

        March 16, 2012 at 7:19 am |
      • iEvolved

        Would you rather believe a shepherd magician or a modern scientist?

        March 16, 2012 at 7:37 am |
    • Jones

      No, Biden. He obviously is showing several democrat traits.

      March 16, 2012 at 7:37 am |
    • Peaceful Hippie Chick

      @ernesto... and I see dead people...

      March 16, 2012 at 9:24 am |
  2. Godfrey

    Where in the Bible does it say that there were different "species" of man?

    This psuedo-science stuff is all HOOEY. There's only one species of man, and he was made in God's image. If you start adding all these other "species" and "evolution" and stuff, pretty soon you'll have to question the Bible itself!

    No sir. God did it, and that's good enough for me. You can keep your monkey bones!

    March 15, 2012 at 7:41 pm |
    • Akira

      Then why are you posting here? Go back to your creationist fantasy world

      March 15, 2012 at 7:45 pm |
      • Godfrey

        I'm posting here because A. I have a right to post here (given by God) and B. I am probably hoping somewhere deep down that I will save a person or two from believing this fairytale science stuff, or at least admitting that it's a fairytale.

        It takes FAITH to believe in science!

        March 15, 2012 at 7:50 pm |
      • Cosmos42

        Oh it totally takes faith to believe in science. After all, just think how much faith it takes to believe your computer, a product of science, works every time you open it up and post comments against science online.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:24 pm |
      • Ed

        Godfrey does God also teach you to be arrogant and closed minded?

        March 15, 2012 at 8:39 pm |
      • Sarcasm Technician

        Forgive them Godfrey...they can't detect sarcasm at all. I haven't fixed their detectors yet. My bad.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:39 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Get on it, Techboy! What do I pay you for?

        March 15, 2012 at 8:43 pm |
      • David

        Agree!!

        March 15, 2012 at 9:06 pm |
      • Jerry

        You, my friend, are the one living in a fantasy world... No such thing as god...

        March 15, 2012 at 9:35 pm |
      • Nah

        It's amazing that you're the most obvious troll in the entire world (nice job at not being subtle), and yet you managed to troll all these people.

        Congratulations.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:19 pm |
      • Kelly

        Godfrey, I/we and the scientific community can show proof that these people existed. They leave behind bones. They leave behind tools and cooking implements. It is proven that they existed. Where is your proof that God existed? And don't give me that crap about man being made in God's image and all that, because if that is your argument, then how do you explain US and the 'Red Deer Cave People? It has been proven that the Earth moves around the sun. It has been proven that the earth is not flat. Gravity has been proven. Prove that the burning bush actually existed. Prove that Jesus turned water into wine. You have a lot of explaining to do if you want to stay in the conversation.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:35 pm |
      • Transplanted58

        Actually, Kelly, I'll give you the part about proving they existed. However, the part about them leaving behind tools and cooking implements, etc, is pure conjecture. Think of it this way...If I bury a dead pet with a few bowls, would you expect your descendants, in 15000 years, to conclude the animal made the pots? All you have is proof that bones and implements were found in the same place. That is NOT proof the two are connected.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:03 pm |
      • Chris M

        @Transplanted58 Unless the pet was a spider monkey, it likely didn't have opposable thumbs capable of making pottery. There's a flaw in your argument.

        March 16, 2012 at 4:16 am |
      • Transplanted58

        Sorry, that's still not proof. Let's try to get through to you one more time. When I die, I get buried next to an iPhone. 15000 years from now, your descendants conclude I designed and built it? Finding two objects side by side is proof of NOTHING except that they may have existed at roughly the same time.

        March 16, 2012 at 7:35 am |
      • Chris M

        @Transplanted58 Are you saying that I'm trying to imply that our ancestors actually fashioned everything they used? Just because early tools and pottery have been found near ancient graves does not necessarily mean that they were designed and built by those particular individuals. It does, however, imply that those individuals USED the tools and pottery based on their shapes and the physiology of those buried with them. I would hope that our descendants are intelligent enough to realize that your iPhone was a relatively primitive tool that held some special meaning to you since you were buried with it.

        March 16, 2012 at 8:43 am |
      • Transplanted58

        OK, CNN is censoring my post. Let's try it one sentence at a time...

        Okay, NOW you've got it! It IMPLIES they used the tools.

        March 16, 2012 at 9:54 am |
      • Transplanted58

        Implication is NOT proof.

        March 16, 2012 at 9:57 am |
      • Transplanted58

        WHY was that word censored? LMAO

        March 16, 2012 at 10:06 am |
      • Chris M

        You are correct. It is not proof. It is evidence. If a man holding a shotgun with a smoking barrel is standing over another man with a gunshot wound, but no one saw the actual shot, it is well beyond a reasonable doubt that the man with the gun shot the other man. Our justice system generally accepts this kind of evidence as proof.

        March 16, 2012 at 10:25 am |
      • Transplanted58

        Chris M, I'm glad you see my point. Not to quibble, but eyewitness evidence is not what is being discussed here...at least I don't think so. If that is indeed the case, there's a bigger story here than the finding of some bones...:)

        March 16, 2012 at 10:29 am |
    • Yarah

      Yes My Friend they can keep their Monkey Bones....lol

      March 15, 2012 at 7:46 pm |
    • chelsea

      people like you scare me

      March 15, 2012 at 7:49 pm |
      • Godfrey

        We scare you because of the example we provide. We set the bar too HIGH, and give you something to contrast your own actions with. God's true believers are the only ones who will get Raptured when the time comes. The rest will be left behind for Satan and his evil host.

        I'd be scared too.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:53 pm |
      • John

        trust me no argument that you have scares me what so ever. There is no argument that you can bring in favor of religion in spite of advancement through science.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:58 pm |
      • john

        good thing god and religion are two different things

        March 15, 2012 at 8:09 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        """We scare you because of the example we provide."""

        No, that's not why.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:17 pm |
      • MrsFizzy

        Psst ...I'm not scared because this has got to be hyperbole ...right?! I mean, you are joking...??

        March 15, 2012 at 8:25 pm |
      • guy0

        Please... rapture yourself off a cliff and save everyone from your stupidity.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:46 pm |
      • banff

        Godfrey your book more carefully
        the word Rapture is not even to be found in the Bible; Nor is the doctrine taught there. Pre-tribulation rapture theology was developed in the 1830s by British evangelist John Nelson Darby. It was made up.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:05 pm |
      • Ari

        Science staring Creationists right in the face and they still can't accept it because it's not in their precious bible.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:16 pm |
      • Thayer

        Godfrey – Evolution is SCIENTIFIC FACT. It's as much fact as the sky is blue. Sorry to break it to you.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:29 pm |
      • Kelly

        I have been Raptured lots of times Godfrey. You should come out of your basement and try it some time. :)

        March 15, 2012 at 10:38 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Thayer: Evolution is just a THEORY. Get your facts straight.

        March 16, 2012 at 2:21 am |
    • A

      I love that you call physical evidence you can see and touch "pseudo-science" and "hooey", yet you eagerly accept an account written by an unidentified individual in the Middle East a few thousand years ago.

      By the way, I'm a Christian and believe in God, but I'm not willing to blindly accept that some ancient Hebrews had a better understanding of human evolution than we can see and touch in the real fossil record today. I believe in evidence just as much as I believe in God.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:51 pm |
      • Godfrey

        You say you're a Christian, but are you really? If so, how can you read the Bible, which gives a perfectly succinct account of human origins, and then at the same time believe that man evolved from creatures like the one above?

        Christ proclaimed the truth of the Bible (the Old Testament). And yet you're saying that the Old Testament is false.

        Think what you want about me, but you're the one being inconsistent. Science and the Bible will never play nicely together. You have to choose.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:56 pm |
      • Kaybearry

        A, I just wanted to say thank you! It is people like you that give religion a good, decent name. You don't blindly follow someone else. You use your brain and think on your own terms! It is others that are ignorant of the world around us that give religion a bad name. Thank you!

        March 15, 2012 at 8:00 pm |
      • A

        The Bible was written by humans and is inherently fallible in that sense. Inspired by God? Of course. Written by God's own hand? Absolutely not.

        Do you eat pork? Do you eat shellfish? Do you follow the letter of the law as laid out in the Old Testament? Do you forbid women to speak in church as Paul wrote? Did you know there are actually 2 creation stories in Genesis, and that comparing them you can find inconsistencies?

        Christ gave 2 laws. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. If I follow these 2 commands, I am a Christian. So yes, I am. Also, God gave us the power of our intellects and the curiosity to study the world around us. As a scientist myself, I find your ability to ignore facts to blindly believe one story of the Bible extremely disturbing.

        Not believing one story in the Bible when I see the facts that this story cannot have happened exactly as written does not automatically falsify the rest of it. I didn't say the entire Old Testament is false. I do say that I have seen the evidence to support the theory of evolution above the theory that all humans were created/appeared exactly in our present forms.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:03 pm |
      • Wow

        Kayberry-
        The very definition of religion is "blindly following someone else". The more faith you have in a supernatural fairy tale, the more virtuous you are.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:05 pm |
      • GeoGuy

        Godfrey is just messing with you all...

        March 15, 2012 at 8:48 pm |
      • Inkpen

        Godfrey – If a religion can convince thousands of people to wear a belt, and kill tens of thousands of innocent people for their beliefs and faith, then yes, extremists like you scare the heck out of me. The same way Santorum scares me... mixing religious law with state law, only a matter of time before people like you start chopping hands as punishment, for spitting on the sidewalk.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:48 pm |
      • Norm

        Well, according to Exodus and such, God actually came down and talked to Moses in person,so ... I won't dispute that, what gets me unsettled, is these physicists at CERN trying to find the "God particle", the Higgs Boson, or whatever to prove what? They spend gazillions of money building this proton racetrack for what? Really, how important is a theoretical sub-atomic particle that will prove the existence of matter? It exists.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:18 pm |
      • Ralf The Dog.

        Do you like electricity? how about driving a car? A better fundamental understanding of how matter works will make it more likely for us to achieve economic fusion, bringing the cost of energy way down. This is just one example, an easy one to understand, many more exist.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:24 pm |
      • Ezo

        @Wow, If you ever took the time to stand next to a dictionary, you would discover that your definition of religion is a fairy tale taking place in your own head. You've brainwashed yourself into believing something that has no sound basis at all. Yet you're criticizing others, and wrongly so, for exhibiting the same behavior. I believe that's the definition of a hypocrite. (You might want to look that one up as well.)

        March 15, 2012 at 11:46 pm |
      • Dan, TX

        Isn't it interesting that people always like to talk about God and evolution as though there is a conflict. The Pope, the infallible representative of God on Earth (if you are Catholic) accepts evolution as the scientific explanation for the origins of humans on Earth. Catholics believe in evolution, and evolution is taught in Catholic schools as the only real scientific explanation for the origin of humans. So, anyone who comments about the Bible and evolution is arguing with the Pope. I think the Pope understands the Bible much more than any of you. So, if you believe in God, you should believe in evolution. After all, evolution is demonstrated in the bible in several places. It is just the misinterpretation of the Bible by people who are ignorant of evolution that are the source of conflict. There is no conflict between evolution and the Bible.

        March 16, 2012 at 12:38 am |
    • iLoveRednecks

      God also created the unemployment and section 8 you obviously collect. Go back to school, finish the 4th grade and learn how to be objective... #banjoPlayin'

      March 15, 2012 at 7:54 pm |
    • knmer1808

      Godfrey –

      Not sure if your comment was in jest, but if not, consider this:
      If you read the original translation of Genesis, Adam and Eve "split" after Cain kills Abel. At that time, there is a subtle passage that implies Adams was with "others" – You may ask yourself, what others?

      Adam and Eve are not the only "humans" rather they represent the original "enlightened" humans – if you look at human history there is a sudden burst of language, arts, tools, development, etc. Adam and Eve represent that moment in our history when modern humans took hold. There were other – less "humans" around at that time but Adam and Eve ushered in the next phase.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:55 pm |
      • Godfrey

        The Bible is very clear: God created Adam and Eve as the FIRST humans. Not the first "enlightened" humans.

        Trying to twist Scripture to fit into what the scientists tell you is an affront to God. His word is final – not these scientists' words, which change all the time – notice how God's word never changes?

        March 15, 2012 at 7:59 pm |
      • Kaybearry

        I applaud you for your efforts in explaining the meaning of the bible. Many people not only simply read the text but only believe what they have been told by a religious figure. Many people quote the bible, they try to convince others of its meanings when they themselves do not actually know what is written in the bible. They have not interpreted the bible on their own. Very sad. I congratulate you for actually using your brain and eyeballs to read instead of blindly following someone else.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:03 pm |
      • Jon

        @knmer1808

        Adam and Eve weren't the first humans around. The religious origins stories are just myths invented to fill in the gaps of knowledge. There were civilizations around before the bible was written and when the authors thought that Adam and Eve existed. The Bible claims that this happened around 4004 BC. Well, China had a civilization at that time. They weren't the best humans, they are just characters in a 2,000 year old story.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:03 pm |
      • Norm

        Well, if Cain and Abel were the next phase, you can see the problems of violence engenderd by the human race.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:26 pm |
      • WASP

        @godfrey: the bible never changes? ok now which of 37+ bibles out there didn't change? look up "banned from the bible 1 and 2" it explains a lot of how the bible changed.

        March 16, 2012 at 7:46 am |
    • John

      lol do you even hear your self. You said your self that the more we learn and understand as a species the more we will question the bible as it dosn't fit. Your right lets stay viciously ignorant and not expand our knowledge as a species. Luckily your way of thinking is slowly and arduously dieing out to allow real progress as a species occur.

      Ignorant creationist aside, this is very cool another step to figuring out our origin. Very cool indeed.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:56 pm |
      • God

        John...I'm watching you...

        Anyway, just to let you know, I really did make Man in my own image. Yes, it's also true that I made Woman, too. It was an after thought. Sorry, guys. Didn't mean to complex up your lives like that, but what's done is done. Like science, not everything I create works out as planned.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:01 pm |
    • fancy19

      You're crazy – k science is proof. You have no proof. Why is it so hard to believe in evolution with all the evidence these days....I don't understand.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:57 pm |
      • Fezzik

        Science isn't proof. Scientists never use the word proof. It is always evedence. You can't prove anything because science has to be kept testable and falsifiable. That's what makes science.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:07 pm |
      • Nah

        Lol, all you mor0ns got trolled by this kid.

        Hilarious.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
      • God

        "Science is fact?" Is that so? Would that be the same science that professed the Earth was flat? The Moon made from green cheese? Eggs are bad for you...no, wait, now good for you? Caffeine is bad...no, wait....now good? Wine will kill you...wait, is good for your heart? We'll run out of oil by 1975....wait, we have massive oil reserves? Fats are bad for you...wait, some fats are good and necessary for your health? The Sun rotates around the Earth...wait, vice-versa is true? Global warming will doom the planet...wait, scientists have been cooking their data to preserve their grants? All Gore invented the Internet...wait, that isn't true? There's no cure for cancer...wait, there are cures? I could go on and on. Bottom line is that science is a messy and often proved wrong hobby for Mankind. Science in it's own operational intent is to attempt to build upon or prove itself wrong to a degree of...of what? Error. To a degree of error. Therefore science is NEVER fact...which puts it on par with religious faith. You should respect both science and faith.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:21 pm |
      • God

        "Science is fact?" Is that so? Would that be the same science that professed the Earth was flat? The Moon made from green cheese? Eggs are bad for you...no, wait, now good for you? Caffeine is bad...no, wait....now good? Wine will kill you...wait, is good for your heart? We'll run out of oil by 1975....wait, we have massive oil reserves? Fats are bad for you...wait, some fats are good and necessary for your health? The Sun rotates around the Earth...wait, vice-versa is true? Global warming will doom the planet...wait, scientists have been cooking their data to preserve their grants? All Gore hinvented the Internet...wait, that isn't true? There's no cure for cancer...wait, there are cures? I could go on and on. Bottom line is that science is a messy and often proved wrong hobby for Mankind. Science in it's own operational intent is to attempt to build upon or prove itself wrong to a degree of...of what? Error. To a degree of error. Therefore science is NEVER fact...which puts it on par with religious faith. You should respect both science and faith (if you want to stay on my good side)

        March 15, 2012 at 11:23 pm |
    • Jesse

      Come on, people. Godfrey is a troll. Stop feeding the trolls.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:57 pm |
      • Godfrey

        You're right, I'm an atheist troll, sort of.

        Truth is, however, I was just being literal. If you take the Bible as literal, science must be denied. And if you take the Bible as allegorical, it has no value.

        Religion is a joke. Why not have some fun with it?

        March 15, 2012 at 8:01 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        """You're right, I'm an atheist troll, sort of. """

        Dang it, Godfrey, we can't tell your rantings from the real thing. What good is that here? Use that on the people who can really use the mental exercise – the belief blog.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:22 pm |
      • Godfrey

        I'm sorry, I was just really, really bored. I had no idea this would get so much attention.

        But it's been fun.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:25 pm |
      • MrsFizzy

        Oh phew, I called it before I even got this far down! But it was pretty realistic. I was hearing Santorum speaking there *shudder*

        March 15, 2012 at 8:27 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Why thank you... uh... I think... {{{{shudder}}}}

        March 15, 2012 at 8:33 pm |
    • Kaybearry

      Yes, I agree with you, you have a right to post a comment based on freedom of speech, given to us by our government. What I do not agree with is your opinion of science. If science is pseudo-science then what, in your opinion, is science? Are you yourself a scientist? If not, how can you comment on what is or is not science? Also, I believe that you misused the word hooey.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:57 pm |
    • Duh!

      The bible is only a collection of stories. I am not an athiest, but surely you can't be so dilluted to think that what the bible is true word for word. Don't you have a mind of your own? How we got here, from single celled organisims, to what we are today is the work of God too. Ever think evolution was part of God's plan?

      March 15, 2012 at 8:00 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Doesn't quite fit the timeline though, does it?

        In order to give the Bible any credit at all, you have to cherry pick the parts that fit in with what modern man knows of the world... until they no longer do. Then you have to discard them too.

        Eventually, nothing will be left.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:03 pm |
      • john

        who said the bible was to be taken literally word for word? where does this nonsense come from? god must be shaking his head on how stupid weve become.. we took the idea of god, caracatured it, then make fun of our own interpretation.. its ridiculous.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:01 pm |
    • Get Real

      Godfrey, are you kidding me? Open your eyes and realize that you are living inside a BOX! It's sad really that someone(you) appears to be an intelligent adult (I mean, you are able to formulate a decent sentence) and you still believe in this ancient, out-dated, adult fairytale GARBAGE. You want your narcissistic god? Keep him! I'll keep my trust in LOGIC AND REASON.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:01 pm |
      • Wow

        He's a troll.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:08 pm |
      • Olijah Elijah

        I will testify that the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ is Son of the Almighty God Jehovah, the God of Abraham and the God of Moses. Jesus Christ is Soon to return to gather His chosen ones from the farthest corners of the Earth. Jesus will cause the Sun to go black and the moon will turn blood red. Then Jesus Christ will call out with a great voice and those who are dead will awaken as imperishable immortal and then the faithful who are living will be changed and then together they will be caught away in clouds to be with the Lord forever and ever AMEN. The RAPTURE means to be caught away and its coming. Those left here on Earth, you will undergo the wrath of God which includes extreme famine, extreme earthquakes, extreme wars, and extreme plagues,. I pray that all the true believers in Jesus Christ begin to repent and prepare the Way of Our Lord Jesus Christ ................ Peace in Syria Homs. Peace in Iran. Peace everywhere... Peace in the name of JAH.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:26 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Dude, you're stealing my schtick. I'M the fake crazy Christian in these parts. Can't you be a fake crazy Muslim or something?

        Plus, as phrased, nobody's going to believe you're for real.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:30 pm |
      • Dorothy

        Godfrey gave himself away with his correct grammar and spelling. :D Thanks, Godfrey. I enjoyed it.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:50 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Heh! So did I!

        March 16, 2012 at 12:55 am |
    • Wow

      I sincerely hope you're being sarcastic.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:02 pm |
      • Godfrey

        I am. Definitely. But people like this do exist.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:03 pm |
      • Wow

        OK I thought so. :) And yes, they do, scarily enough.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:09 pm |
    • M E

      Actually you have the right to post here because you have freedom of speech, a freedom that was fought for by soldiers so really you should thank a veteran for that. Same goes for your freedom of religion.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:06 pm |
      • Norm

        Yes, indeed, thank the veterans! And thank Jesus, too! I'm good with believing in science and the Bible, no problemo.No, I'm not a creationist.Einstein believid in God, so there.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:34 pm |
      • Ralf The Dog.

        When Einstein talked about god, he was talking about the mathematical rules that make the universe work. When he talked about the, "Mind of God", he was taking about the way these rules interact.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:43 pm |
    • Akira

      You're projecting like any other scientifically illiterate creationist, thinking science is a religion that relies on faith. It is that kind of thinking that poisons the minds of future scientific minds in our youth. Science holds nothing sacred, only ideas that are backed by solid evidence and reproducible results survive scientific scrutiny, everything else is discarded. That is why Darwin's theory of evolution is still around. It is not some sacred dogma, it stood up to 150 years of scrutiny from scientists from all over the world.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:07 pm |
      • Ralf The Dog.

        Not true, Scientists hold the idea of pocket protectors making you look cool sacred. That and, "Chicks dig propeller hats with motors."

        March 15, 2012 at 8:50 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Ralf, dogs like you are what's wrong with America.

        Hell in a hand basket, that's where we're headed! Next they'll let the women vote!

        March 16, 2012 at 2:17 am |
    • skarphace

      The question you need to be asking, 'Godfrey', is not why do scientists believe in carbon dating (which is how they determined that these fossiles were from the stone age, by the way), but rather if no such creature existed, then why did God put these bones in the earth for us to dig up and study?

      Why would god want to introduce that level of doubt in the minds of those of us intelligent enough to follow the trail of evidence that we call 'evolution'? By the way, I am not asking this blindly. I actually went to a Baptist church for a while where the pastor actually claimed that God put the dinosaur bones in the earth already fossilized. He never really explained why God would do this. He merely said that God 'could' do this; there was nothing to stop him from doing so.

      It seems that you are thinking along these same lines as the Baptist preacher, so I ask you: why would God do such a thing? What would the objective be of doing something like this?

      Oh, by the way, I can already guess what your answer is going to be: "Who am I to know the mind of God?" If that is your answer, then just keep it to yourself.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:08 pm |
    • Akira

      Another point, who says that science has to defer to the Bible or any other "holy book"? If scientific discoveries contradict your religious sensibilities, so be it. It's not the purpose of science to confirm what is written in some religious text, if it were, you don't have science anymore, you have apologetics.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:10 pm |
      • Godfrey

        You make excellent points. I am now cured.

        All hail Science!

        March 15, 2012 at 8:13 pm |
    • madjim

      No where in the bible does it tell you to be an idiot and accept faith blindly. Common sense and the sciences are based on observations and on experiments and research. I believe in God – but it doesn't mean science is not real and it certainly does allow room for evolution. Faith and science are not exculsive of each other. Moreover, the bible tells you many things that many christians today do not pracitice – including:

      God creates day and night on the first day, but doesn't create the sun or the stars until the 4th. (Genesis 1:3-5, 16-19)
      That we shouldn't eat pork.
      That we should stoned all women who have affairs
      so forth and so on...

      maybe you should read your bible more carefully before declaring it as the end all be all.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:14 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Are you sure about that? The one unforgivable sin is unbelief...

        March 15, 2012 at 8:22 pm |
      • Norm

        Nah, dude, Christ put an end to that stoning adultresses trip.Remember the " whichever one of you is without sin, shall cast the first stone" deal? Of course, Jesus don't cut no ice with the muslims, apparently.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:42 pm |
    • rob

      Get lost troll...

      March 15, 2012 at 8:14 pm |
    • Richard

      I wonder what your right side is thinking?

      March 15, 2012 at 8:15 pm |
      • Godfrey

        I can't quite decipher it, but it has something to do with ribeye steak and beer.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:23 pm |
      • WASP

        @godfrey: lol blastfemer......i know i spelled that wrong. mmmmm dead animal and beer. :)

        March 16, 2012 at 8:02 am |
    • pn

      I hope you are joking, but it is not that funny given that so many seem to believe that the world is 6000 years old.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:16 pm |
      • Godfrey

        The benighted will always be among us. But how can you pity them if they refuse to open their eyes?

        Better to sell them magic trinkets and retire to the Hamptons.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:36 pm |
    • Ron Harding

      Dinosaurs and Wooly Mammouths aren't mentioned in the Bible either. Perhaps Noah didn't take them with him. Also, the entire continents of the Americas, Austrailia, and Antarctica aren't mentioned as well. I suppose that they're ALL a hoax !!

      March 15, 2012 at 8:19 pm |
    • freethinker

      I'm going to assume that this is a joke post, simply to rile people up. There is no way that you can be so blind. You act like questioning a 2,000 year old book written by uneducated idiots is such a wild idea!

      March 15, 2012 at 8:25 pm |
      • Godfrey

        It was until relatively recently. Now, thankfully, it's catching on.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:40 pm |
    • killallthewhiteman

      Must be so easy going through life thinking like that. Whenever your kids ask you a question that you do not know the answer to, you can just say "God did it." Whenever something bad happens to you, you can assume it is a test from god. Whenever something bad happens to you, you can chalk it up to God is smiling down on you. You do not physically have to help anyone around you because people like you think that prayer is more powerful than actions.If that were the case there would be no more evil in this world. There would be no starving children in this world, and Tim Tebow would have won 20 super bowls.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:28 pm |
    • Okay

      Nice trolling, 8/10.
      Would read again.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:30 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Aw, shucks. Stop it some more...

        I didn't realize trolling was rated, but... thanks!

        March 15, 2012 at 8:39 pm |
    • God Free

      do you question science when you fly in an airplane, turn on a light or use your computer to post comments revealing how ignorant you are on the internet? Its funny how you question science with evidence but accept religion blindly. Do yourself a favor and question both. You'll find religion will answer all the questions with "because it`s god's will" while science will actually give you an answer. "because it`s god`s will" basically means "because I said so"

      March 15, 2012 at 8:31 pm |
      • Ralf The Dog.

        Aircraft are not real. They are a NWO hoax. People who think they are on aircraft are on buses, with movie projectors for windows. If you look up and see an aircraft, it is just a kite. If the Earth were round, we would all roll off the side. What kind of LibTard are you?

        March 15, 2012 at 8:58 pm |
      • Fezzik

        That's a misconception. Science doesn't give answers, it just get's as close as possible. Science in always testable and falsifiable. Nothing in science is absolute.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:02 pm |
    • McKeen

      Godfrey,

      You commented that you have a "God-given right" to post on CNN blogs. I can confirm for any unbelievers on this board. It's in Leviticus, with the rest of the scripture covering use of the internet, replacing hard drives, and upgrading RAM. Geesh.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:32 pm |
      • Godfrey

        The Internet isn't in the Bible. It's a wicked, evil, delicious thing.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:37 pm |
    • LeRoy

      Are people really this ignorant? My goodness people, get a life, from wherever you believe that life comes from.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:34 pm |
    • Rim

      It doesnt take faith to believe in science, it only takes an ounce of intelligence to understand facts.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:41 pm |
    • Ed

      Godfrey God created the universe and from there man and posibly others evolved on the various planets in the universe. If you were not so closed minded and arrogant beleiving what other men who call themselves Christians preach to you (brainwashing) then you could see that both theories are not mutually exclusive and actually compliment each other.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:43 pm |
    • smart

      HA!

      March 15, 2012 at 8:47 pm |
    • Fezzik

      You do realize that evolution is just change in genetic make up over time. In other words, populations get taller or shorter over time or finches beaks become specialized so that they can feed on different types of food. There is more evidence for evolution than there is for photosynthesis. It is also completely possible to believe in evolution and still believe in God. There are many religious scientists.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:48 pm |
    • Grampa1

      God(frey) – They have evidence, research, logic, and brains on their side. You have...well... no evidence (just blind faith), no research (except maybe reading the Bible over and over – and blind faith), no logic (but lots of blind faith), and as far as brains...well...you're probably good to your mother. On balance, I'll go with the scientists.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:51 pm |
      • Bob

        OK, gramps, you do realize that you posted this at least 20 minutes after Godfrey admitted that his post was a joke?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:56 pm |
    • Kmac499

      Some people live by a Readers Digest version of the Bible. Genesis seems to have two version of woman's creation, creation as the earth and the heavens with heavens as other stars and planets, Later he comes back and puts light in the night sky. Cain and Able going out to marry into other people are examples. People who write here often are staking all their claim on their "found meaning of the Bible". How do they know they are getting the true message. It states Eva is the mother of all living things–explain that. Then there is "enmity" between the seeds of Eva and Serpent. How about the Sons of God marrying women of the earth. Not Angels but "Sons of God". None of you can explain that. The Bible could be 100% truth and its just not understood. NO ONE KNOWS. Thats why they call them theory. And you that think you interpert it correctly are full of sh===ving cream.

      %

      March 15, 2012 at 9:05 pm |
    • jwarino

      time to get a clue. 3 million years of human evolution trumps a book that is obsessed with male dominance and war.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:07 pm |
    • WritinStone

      When you begin from any assumption, such as all life must reflect a book, you are prohibiting yourself from discovering truth. Remember that the final books voted to be in the Bible by a council were not finalized until 3 centuries after Christ lived. So for 3 centuries (our equivalent of 1712) Christians lived without a Bible, fighting over which interpretation would win out as "true". There's not much in that history for us to rely upon as factual. I'm sorry. God bless you in your journey deeper into the wisdom that goes far beyond any book.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:08 pm |
    • Kmac499

      KK Denver–didn't Cain and Able to that?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:09 pm |
    • Layne

      Where in the Bible does it mention #2 lead pencils, banana milkshakes, or fuel injection?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:20 pm |
    • select20

      Amen.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:24 pm |
    • allanhowls

      If you don't believe in "species," then you don't believe in DNA.
      Not believing in DNA, you are now prohibited from partaking in modern medicine.
      No more vaccines for you.

      Sorry, but you don't get it both ways. You can have scientific fact better understood than gravity itself, or you can have a book written by 3000-year-old shepherds. Take your pick.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:43 pm |
    • Science is GOD

      Godfrey, to each his own. We will all find out when we die. Me, I believe in science because it is REAL, I can see it and smell it and touch it. I have a hard time basing my entire life on text that was written before people even knew we lived on a planet orbiting a sun. To me there is no argument but I do not know for sure and will admit it. Could I be wrong? Sure! I guess each of us will find out when we die.

      See you then!

      March 15, 2012 at 9:49 pm |
    • bob

      u r very funny

      March 15, 2012 at 9:50 pm |
    • JT

      Godfrey, do we belong to the same church, landoverbaptist.org?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:51 pm |
      • Godfrey

        Oh yes we do, brother! Oh yes we do.

        March 16, 2012 at 1:03 am |
    • Hien Tu

      Good Lord! This has to be the longest flame I've ever seen. You people need to learn not to feed the trolls.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:52 pm |
      • Godfrey

        But they're so damned CUTE. And hungry...

        March 16, 2012 at 1:52 am |
    • Truthology

      Radical Christianity, catholicism or any organized religion taken to the extreme where fear allows a person to fear education based in fact because it opposes beliefs which are not is just as dangerous as radical islamists who caused 9/11 making the above person just as dangerous, Do you take an eye for an eye too? If you think all the answers exist in a manual you are a very dangerous person and I pray, yes pray you dont procreate and teach impressionable children fables meant as guidelines to be literal scaring them through a non existing vengeful God as opposed to a loving creative force.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:54 pm |
      • Truthology

        The person above I was referring to is @ Godfrey and all who follow this fixed impenatrable close-minded ideology.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:03 pm |
    • sam stone

      i will take the "monkey bones", you can keep your iron age comic book, okay?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:59 pm |
    • Scott

      So I always find it interesting that creationists are always trolling for stories about evolution. Maybe deep down in places you don't talk about in church functions your looking for the key piece of evidence in evolution that will get you out of your chair and you can stop staring at shadows on the wall.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:05 pm |
    • Rose

      I guess if its not in the bible it cant exist..... thats why dinosaurs were planted by satan to confuse us according to one museum.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:06 pm |
    • Harvey Wallbanger

      i do question the Bible. What evidence do we have the Bible is the word of God? The only evidence is that the book claims it is. There is no other evidence that supports the claim except for the self reference. This means I could write a book that claims to be the word of God and have the same amount of evidence backing up the claim as does the Bible.

      At least with the theory of evolution, there is a lot of evidence supporting it besides some booking referencing itself. I consider this to be more likely to be true than something that is not backed up by any external evidence.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:07 pm |
    • hillman

      they are trying to make us believe this?lmao

      March 15, 2012 at 10:15 pm |
    • mickey1313

      your ignorant openion is sad. Why do you post in the science section if you are brainwashed to only follow the thiest belief. Zero facts, zero sense.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:43 pm |
    • K. Politis

      LMAO. Nice impression of a stupid religious fanatic.

      Good one.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:51 pm |
      • Godfrey

        How dare you. Jesus is Lord.

        But thanks for the compliment.

        March 16, 2012 at 1:59 am |
    • Teresa

      if your bible is the "word of God" why has there been so many versions of it? Seems like every time people started thinking for themselves some pope or bishop comes up with a new version to scare every one back into submission. Face it, it's a group of short stories put together to make you fear what the current revisionary wants you to fear.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:06 pm |
    • Palin 2112

      Good grief Godfrey, your sacasm has brought out the ignorance in many posters.
      Great job.
      the funniest one is the guy screaming that evolution is a proven fact. While every science book clearly states that it's a theory.
      Some folks just aren't as smart as they claim to be. I have no problem with folks who don't believe in the Bible. But when they try to discuss science and can't get the basic facts about science straight. All they have to do is Google this stuff. THEN they go and try to criticize the Bible, a book they haven't read or even have a clue to what it's about.
      So, to Godfreys responders it doens't matter (to me at least) if you belive in the Bible or in Science but please take the time to do some research and avoid sounding like a fool

      March 15, 2012 at 11:13 pm |
    • Wait....

      God gave you the right to post on CNN's website? Damn he must be really specific in what rights he gives people. Is there a list published by God somewhere on what websites you can and cannot post to? Or is it specific to a person. Do I have to pray for a copy of this list or can I go to GodGivenRight.org or something to see the specifics? I'm very confused.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:33 pm |
    • Fritz

      There's something familiar about that guy with the beard. A new human species? Maybe, but I'm inclined to believe he's just a newly discovered variation on the species. Just another breed of human that went extinct. Not another species like the Neandertal folks.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:38 pm |
    • Phil Godfrey

      Well, this Godfrey (me, Phil Godfrey) doesn't believe in god. You can boo hoo science, but science is what allows you to do so many things, everyday. There is no evidence of god anywhere on this planet or in the universe. I've questioned the bible for the past 20 years and I can do it without any consequences.

      Religion. It's like history class, but without the facts.

      March 16, 2012 at 12:00 am |
    • Mani

      My dear George, As you argue, unfortunatley you have to question the bible itself on the creationisim. There is a reason why religion is called faith. You blindly believe in them and embrace them without any question. That is perfectly fine. But that blindness shut your logic and reasoning completly on the scientific facts or any other hard evidence that is counter to your belief. You have all the rights to either question your faith or the science. But you have to remember that questioning science based on your blind belief does not have much meat. You may site millions following your belief as a proof. Still it does not change the scientific facts.

      March 16, 2012 at 12:23 am |
    • Chris

      The obvious trolling aside, you ought to read your bible again. What species was Goliath? According to the bible, he was part of a race of giants.

      Arguments over the centuries have also been made about the descendants of Cain, and of Noah's cursed son, although arguments were very flawed and clearly only existed as a weak attempt to legitimatized slavery and other atrocities.

      So there you have it, whether you're trolling or not (and I think you are), the bible does allow for at least one or more separate species of human from the one currently dominating the Earth.

      March 16, 2012 at 1:28 am |
      • Godfrey

        The giants were the genetic product of human females and the sons of God (not including Jesus, who came later and was a virgin, conceived of a virgin, but still descended from Moses through his non-sperm-donating father, Joseph, who wasn't his father, actually, but let's not split hairs).

        So you see, scientifically, these where of the same species as men, since they came from the wombs of female men (let's just call them women). Giants are human, as we can see today in their descendants (Shaq, Magic Johnson, etc.).

        Here's the point: there are many things in the Bible that seem improbable (like the talking donkey in Numbers 22:21-29) but that doesn't mean these things weren't real at the time. Many things happened in olden times (like the talking donkey in Numbers 22:21-29) that cannot be explained by so-called "science". That doesn't mean they didn't happen.

        According to the Bible, they did. And that's good enough for me. I'm not impressed by monkey bones.

        March 16, 2012 at 2:11 am |
    • Bill

      Godfrey,

      Read Genesis, it talks about laying down with otehr creatures, not the man as mentioned in the Bible, but "Other children". That sounds like different species to me.

      March 16, 2012 at 7:30 am |
    • iEvolved

      Do you still believe world is 6000 yeas old? Just curious.

      March 16, 2012 at 7:39 am |
    • dave

      lol.. i see what you did there sir..... people, op isn't serious, he's a troll..... for you non-internet junkies: a troll posts an obviously ignorant/inflamatory post (that he doesn't even believe) in an internet comment section or blog for the mere pleasure of angering other commentors who take what he says seriously... don't fall for the trap, don't feed the trolls

      March 16, 2012 at 7:46 am |
    • DebAH

      @Godfrey Ya see, therein lies the problem. We were created in God's own image but what exactly does God look like? For all we know, God looks exactly like the man above.

      March 16, 2012 at 7:58 am |
  3. kissyface

    they didnt find him , that dude tried to wash my windsheild at a intersection .

    March 15, 2012 at 7:39 pm |
    • Kevin

      lol

      March 15, 2012 at 7:42 pm |
  4. Captain Kirk

    it looks nothing like Obama, but it does have Bush's features, and if this is supposed to be a black creature, why does it have white people hair on it's head and all over it's body??

    March 15, 2012 at 7:38 pm |
    • MrsFizzy

      'Cos it's a different species...
      How do they know what color it and its hair were anyway?

      March 15, 2012 at 8:29 pm |
      • Terre08

        It? He you mean?

        March 16, 2012 at 1:00 am |
  5. Jay

    this is just a black guy

    March 15, 2012 at 7:38 pm |
  6. Scott

    Did anyone else find this statement weird...?

    "Initial DNA testing conducted on the fossils did not show evidence of human DNA, but Curnoe and his team will push forward."

    March 15, 2012 at 7:37 pm |
    • Gustavo

      No, it isn't weird. It means that the techniques used to extract DNA were unsuccessful to find any DNA at all (human or otherwise). This is a common problem while trying to extract DNA from old samples, even in the case of modern corpses recovered from crime scenes (i.e. only a few years old). They may have found some microbial DNA (expected, since microbes are all over).
      They will continue trying, using alternative techniques.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:43 pm |
      • hillman

        oh for christ sakes we were not monkeys or an animal we are a totally different kind of species we were put here bye a race of other worldly beings and i would like to have testing done myself on monkeys to prove it ill pay for it to be done.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
      • Chris

        Hillman, the testing has already been done and published many times over. The degree of difference between human DNA and what we take to be our closest Ape relatives is only a few percent. The variation within the human species, whether relatives or not and even comparing whites to blacks to asians to australian aborigines, is less than 0.01 if I recall correctly.

        March 16, 2012 at 1:33 am |
    • Andrew

      From skimming the paper, it seems the problem isn't that the DNA appears to be something else, it's that it's realtivly hard to find a high quality sample.
      "The morphology doc-mented at Longlin and Maludong might be interpreted as consistent with this hypothesis, the Chinese remains perhaps sampling a previously unknown human population (or migration?) that may not have contributed genetically to recent East Asians. Ancient DNA could allow for a test of this idea, however, our ongoing attempts to extract DNA from a specimen from Maludong have so far proven unsuccessful owing to a lack of recoverable genetic material."

      PS, CNN, fix your whitespace filters god da–it. "Doc-umented" should not need a hyphen just because you're not willing to check for a whitespace before and after the offending string.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:44 pm |
    • Kaybearry

      I'm guessing what they meant is that they tried to amplify any DNA that could be remaining in the bones using a few human DNA primers but were unable to detect any DNA. That statement was written a bit funny, I had to read it a few times.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:51 pm |
  7. Rich

    Dear people commenting on Obama in these comments: If you have to resort to comparing a picture of ancient human to the president to try to make a point, you clearly have no actual point to stand on. Grow up and do some evolution of your own. You're clearly still in elementary school.

    March 15, 2012 at 7:31 pm |
    • gizzy

      Chill out Rich

      March 15, 2012 at 7:33 pm |
    • US Army Officer

      You're right, Rich. The meanspirited comments by conservative posters are totally uncalled for. They could never utter these insults in public, so they do it here.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:46 pm |
      • Rich

        I don't even know how to respond to that claim. Clearly everyone, including conservatives, express their opinions all the time. But can't we make comments more appropriate to the topic? This article isn't about Obama or politics. Are you really defending people making racist Obama jokes?

        March 15, 2012 at 7:51 pm |
      • Republican

        Mean comments are only allowed by libbies, sheez.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:52 pm |
    • Chris

      They're just hired posters for the Republican campaigns and their Super-PAC sponsors. They've been flooding discussion forums with anti-Obama garbage for years if you haven't noticed, and it's always a bunch of hateful nonsense. Or maybe it's just what George W Bush does in all of his spare time after years of people legitimately criticizing the lack of WMDs in Iraq.

      March 16, 2012 at 1:37 am |
  8. chris

    funny how we show any variation of the human species that is not us with excessive facial and body hair. Do bones really indicate how "hairy" we are? Or is that depiction based more on our perception/biases?

    March 15, 2012 at 7:31 pm |
    • Rich

      My guess is that a lot of it has to do with the lack of razors readily available to ancient man and known origins of a more ape-like nature.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:32 pm |
    • goodegyptian

      yes. there are holes in the bones those represent hair cells.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:33 pm |
    • Rod

      It's based on the inference that they were genetically closer to apes

      March 15, 2012 at 7:41 pm |
    • Ralf The Dog.

      And the climate. If they did not have hair, they would be quite cold. Those that had hair, would be more likely to live to have children.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:03 pm |
  9. goodegyptian

    He looks like very angry George W. Bush.

    March 15, 2012 at 7:29 pm |
  10. Yarah

    LOL.....LOL.....LOL......LOL.....Here we go again with more false findings. They must be looking for grant money. What a joke...Red Deer Cave people might represent a new population, possibly a new species," Curnoe said.????? I can't tell you how many times I have read things like this only to be found to be a HOAX. LOL

    March 15, 2012 at 7:26 pm |
    • Rich

      So... you're saying it's impossible to ever find a new human species. I find that claim far more dubious than the claims in the article.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:33 pm |
      • Yarah

        LOL..............LOL...

        March 15, 2012 at 7:38 pm |
      • Rich

        Oh, a troll. I've read about you troll-types. I think I'm supposed to get angry or something? I probably would be if I didn't know what it was like to be a child once, too. You'll grow out of it. :)

        March 15, 2012 at 7:41 pm |
    • bajadelmar

      No, money is what religious leaders want and people like you, who believe in magic sky fairies, are foolish enough to keep giving it. You sound like someone who's afraid to admit when they're wrong.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:33 pm |
    • MandoZink

      You possibly do not know where to read about real research. The "EurekAlert" web site is a good one for starters. They post links daily to REAL research being done. There are many, many more legitimate sites about the web. I have visited a few conspiracy websites that harp about hoaxes and funding. Those sites range from amusing to pathetic. Once you get turned on to real science, you can go back to those sites and register your disgust. Good luck!

      March 15, 2012 at 7:35 pm |
    • Mateo in Utah

      Name one hoax other than Piltdown man. And then google: Hominid Species and broaden your myopic world view! Hoax indeed... like the bronz aged fairytale about two naken people in a garden with a snake?

      March 15, 2012 at 7:36 pm |
      • Yarah

        You guys will fall for anything.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:40 pm |
      • MandoZink

        We should ask Yarah to name a hoax that science itself was NOT able to expose. Real science is about verification. He obviously loves to trash subjects he did not take in school.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:02 pm |
      • john

        wasnt the piltdown enough?

        March 15, 2012 at 8:10 pm |
    • Chris

      It's a joint Australian and Chinese team. I don't see where American budget politics comes into this. In the end, wouldn't you want China spending more money on non-military and non-espionage research?

      March 16, 2012 at 1:39 am |
  11. Captain Kirk

    who knew they had a prehistoric Great Clips?

    March 15, 2012 at 7:25 pm |
    • gizzy

      Place in history does not matter, blacks have always had barbershops bro.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:28 pm |
    • A

      It's possible that they had hair similar to "fur" that only grows to a genetically predisposed length like dogs, cats, etc...

      March 15, 2012 at 7:39 pm |
  12. John

    This is just another ad campaign to get obama's face out there for re-election.

    March 15, 2012 at 7:18 pm |
    • really

      That joke has been done nearly every other post here. My 6 year old can come up with better zingers than you.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:21 pm |
    • Rich

      Pathetic.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:22 pm |
    • gizzy

      phenomenal

      March 15, 2012 at 7:24 pm |
    • Suchcrap

      I would vote for the Red Deer Man before I would vote for Obama. The RD man looks more intelligent.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:24 pm |
      • Rich

        Where was your genius detector when GWB was running in two different elections? To say Obama is unintelligent simply because you disagree with his policies is ridiculous. You may as well declare anyone who likes food or music you don't is an idiot.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:36 pm |
      • bajadelmar

        Yeah and you probably voted for DUHbya twice. So how did that work out for us??? LOL at such ignorant "'mericans".

        March 15, 2012 at 7:39 pm |
      • Inkpen

        What's the point of these posts when no-one can stay on topic. All I've read so far are a few people with something good to add, the rest are racist, bigoted and just stupid!!! And what has politics got to do with the discovery of a possible new species of man???

        March 15, 2012 at 9:11 pm |
    • Republican

      haha – now that's funny!

      March 15, 2012 at 7:28 pm |
    • MandoZink

      I think you're just jealous that a superior species ate all your red deer meat.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:38 pm |
    • rob

      You are truly disgusting...

      March 15, 2012 at 8:22 pm |
    • MrsFizzy

      So much for Evolution!! 9_9

      March 15, 2012 at 8:32 pm |
  13. ARIOCH

    That's not a new human species, it's my uncle Jose.

    March 15, 2012 at 7:16 pm |
  14. BlackDiamonds

    From article:
    An artist's reconstruction from Chinese fossils illustrates what may be a newly discovered human species, experts say.

    I rest my case.

    The picture is not true it's a made up image from someone's imagination. The article did not show the picture of the bones or the cave. I do not believe articles or scientists who hide information. Sort of like the dinosaur. Who has ever seen a real life dinosaur? The image of the dinosaur is based on what we imagine them to appear to be based off of bones. Have you ever seen a human skeleton? How are you to know what a human being actually looks like based solely from looking at a skeleton? (an approximation, computer program, an expert) – whatever!

    Scientists in my opinion prove every day that GOD is real.

    When you let your mind wonder to things that are false the imagination will run wild. Once you are off that narrow road to the LORD you enter into a broad realm of make believe and lies that appear so real but are nothing more than lies. That’s the thing about a lie it is made to appear real to fool others .

    March 15, 2012 at 7:12 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      If you buy my magic stick for $1,000,000, it will bring you straight to God. I'm the only one with this stick and I won't lower my price. If you don't buy my stick, you have no hope.
      Prove that I'm wrong, or hand over your cash.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:14 pm |
      • pukinbuzzard

        can you prove there was no god,you keep your believes,and i will keep mine. just because your smarter than the average monkey means nothing to me. most of your educated believes comes from draft dodgers who wouldnt serve their country anyway.

        March 25, 2012 at 3:34 am |
      • fimeilleur

        @punkinbuzzard,

        proof lies with the person making the claim of fact: can you disprove the existence of leprochauns? Unicorns? Minotaurs? Flying Spaghetti Monster? no, you can't... so if I say they are real, and you can't disprove me, then I MUST be right. Same thing with your version of god.

        March 25, 2012 at 11:45 am |
    • really

      You clearly haven't even bothered reading the actual journal article. It's cited in the above article.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:17 pm |
    • amaathya

      Very true, I agree with you hundred percent . This proves that the Earth is flat , and that humans came from Adam and Eve and a million years of incest. This fossil is a kink in the theory of evolution.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:18 pm |
    • really

      Oh, and "When you let your mind wonder to things that are false the imagination will run wild."

      I couldn't agree more. Maybe you need to take your own advice.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:19 pm |
    • jess

      well said!!

      March 15, 2012 at 7:20 pm |
    • jaker

      How do you jump from using your imagination to construct an image based on bone structure to proving god is real? I would actually say that believing in the stories of the bible and imagining a supernatural being is pretty strong on the imagination.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:21 pm |
    • LaserDuck

      You've got to be kidding... how do you think law enforcement solves homicides if they can't reconstruct appearance from skeletal evidence? But hey, I guess I don't even need to bother arguing with a thick-minded individual as you.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:21 pm |
    • Suchcrap

      Your comment was an interesting one and I somewhat agreed with your seemingly intelligent thinking. All that disappeared when you mentioned a god, and I now just conclude you are a religious nutcase.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:22 pm |
    • ItIsSo

      So, what do you imagine a dinosaur to look like? We have the bones. They are on display and are constantly being found all over the world. We have have evidence of the entire skeletons before they are extracted and "remade" at the museum. Is there some multi-million dollar dinosaur scam we're not aware of? Who's getting rich off of faking dinosaurs. I want their job.

      There's this great little thing called technology which allows us to create a "skin" over bone to provide a picture of what something or someone looked like before they died. It's used all the time in police cases where a skeleton is found and they need to identify the victim. It's pretty accurate and has helped may relatives come forward to identify their loved ones.

      I don't think you're enlightened because you believe in God. I think you may be living in a cave. Be religious. Believe. I don't care. Just don't say it's not true because it's not written in you Bible. The bible didn't mention the Chinese or many other ethnic groups. Are they too a lie?

      March 15, 2012 at 7:22 pm |
    • nonovyerbeezwax

      BD, read a book other than the Bible. Non-fiction would be a good start to getting an education, which is something you sorely need.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:23 pm |
    • Rich

      It's humorous to see someone decry an artist's rendering as imagination, yet defend Christianity. Just as with this article, they have ignored logic and evidence, choosing the comfort of a blissful lie instead.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:24 pm |
    • Harvey Wallbanger

      Law enforcement routinely reconstructs faces from skulls to help in the identification of murder victims. It is uncanny how close the reconstructions look like the actual people.

      Thew real issue is how blinded some are by the Book. The evidence can be overwhelming, yet those blinded will refuse to see it.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:25 pm |
    • quick question

      @blackdiamonds

      how do you know god is real. have you seen him? Or do you just make up similar assumptions based on scripture somebody else wrote about him? are you not the same as the scientists, using your mind to connect the dots left behind by the physical evidence.

      there is more separate accounts of dinosaurs existence than of jesus. but does this negate one while adding validity the other? No, not at all. Thats why science is knowledge and religion is faith; science is the answer to how, religion is the answer to why. They both relate to us, and our understanding of life, but pertain to different facets of that understanding.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:28 pm |
      • Ashrakay

        Good point. I suspect the artist's depiction of god is sufficient evidence in this case.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:40 pm |
    • Leucadia Bob

      @ BlackDiamonds – here ya go buddy:

      March 15, 2012 at 7:29 pm |
    • Yakobi

      Psst, BlackDiamonds...I'm gonna let you in on a little secret: There are no gods or goddesses, demons or devils, ghosts or goblins. Religion was invented by man to control the masses.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:38 pm |
      • is

        "The control of the masses" is a leftist leaning terminology for discrediting a system that is still central in the development of most civil societies. Religion is a political tool indeed, I agree with you on this, and as a tool it can be used or disabused, as one can see throughout history. Catholicism is perceived as a religious expression, but in reality it is the continuation of the pre-christian Roman Empire in different robes. However, religion is not only a political tool it is also a necessary personal artifice to make sense of the chaos of one's own existence and cosmic insignificance. Some would argue that language and religion developed hand in hand. No doubt the red dear people had some similar constructs, as the Neanderthals had.

        March 16, 2012 at 10:59 am |
    • Les

      I think you did not reasd the PoS paper before delving into the world of nonsense. Also, the ONLY Xtians that do nort except evolution (which, BTW, is clearly supported by Gen. 2) are the Ev-il-angelicans and other repressive cults such as Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Born Agains.

      Since you seem to be privy to what god actually thinks, I would like to know how thick the flat earth is, how many snakes have bitten you and how many cups of poison you have drank. And, how long are Moses' horns.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:38 pm |
    • Ashrakay

      @BlackDiamonds,
      Until 2 weeks ago, we didn't have photographs of atoms and the ones we have are not at all helpful. However, we've used the Bohr Model since 1913, which is based on the orbits of our solar system to represent it. Countless scientists have learned from this model and it has paved the way for all of the medicines you take when you're sick. The model looks nothing like the photograph, yet, it has representational value which has led to the advancement of science. This method also applies to other minute things like DNA, but also grand scale things like the earth's crust and core. No one has actually had the opportunity to cut the earth in half to observe these things. They are strictly artist's renderings of things we understand from our mathematical calculations and physical observations.

      Personally as an artist and designer, I used things like boxes and arrows to show how a website will work. Luckily my clients are intelligent enough to believe that the website could exist even though the boxes look nothing like a website.

      "Scientists in my opinion prove every day that GOD is real." If that's is what you get from science and scientists then I suspect a jesus on a grilled cheese sandwich would be sufficient proof for you.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:39 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      """The picture is not true it's a made up image from someone's imagination."""

      Really? And that picture of Jesus that's plastered in every kiddie book in bible school is a reasonable likeness?

      Do you believe that Jesus was a longhaired fair-skinned Caucasian? Or not?

      March 15, 2012 at 8:29 pm |
    • MrsFizzy

      And I'll bet you have no problem with the Shroud of Turin.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:34 pm |
    • Cedar Rapids

      ah another one using sarcasm like the guy earlier. Nice one blackdiamonds, that was pretty close to what the religious nutjobs say, you caught the rhetoric almost perfectly.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:17 pm |
    • Aezel

      I prayed to Zeus and he said that HE is the only true path. You can't prove he doesn't exist.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:16 pm |
    • Chris

      It's relatively easy to study a skeleton and figure out where muscle and other tissues were connected, and how strongly. From there you add layers of skin and you get a pretty good idea of what the person looked like. Soft tissues like the lips might be wrong, but most of it is correct. Then the scientists in this case add hair and skin pigment that is similar to what is found in modern apes, and you get the above picture.

      A computer can do all of this in a very short amount of time, but that is another piece of technology that you religious types seem to have no problem benefiting from even though its very existence and function proves that science is right about the universe, counter to most religious dogma.

      March 16, 2012 at 1:44 am |
  15. mommaearth

    Looks a hell of alot smarter than present day humans

    March 15, 2012 at 7:09 pm |
    • Silly you

      "a lot" is two words.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:57 pm |
      • Matt

        Case in point.

        March 19, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
  16. giggity

    Linsanity

    March 15, 2012 at 6:55 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      They also found a skeleton that looked much like Carmelo Anthony and it had its arms wrapped around a primitive basketball...scientists suspect this protohuman refused to share the ball with others. Sound familiar?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:58 pm |
  17. Loyal Northern Democrat

    Is this another one of Obama's uncles?

    March 15, 2012 at 6:54 pm |
    • Andacar

      LND, ya'lls white sheet dun caught on fire!

      March 15, 2012 at 7:04 pm |
    • Frank

      Looks at lot like GWB

      March 15, 2012 at 7:16 pm |
    • SELENA MARLO

      THE PHOTO LOOKS LIKE OBAMA AND SOME OF HIS RELATIVES...

      March 15, 2012 at 7:29 pm |
  18. qularknoo

    1. they found a partial lower jaw ... and "created" the rest of the skull from imagination ... then said "oh, this might be a new species".
    2. have you ever seen people with under bites, lantern jaws, narrow lower and upper jaws, etc ....? were there variations back 10,000 years too?

    March 15, 2012 at 6:52 pm |
    • Jadugara

      That one jawbone, based on what the article seems to say, is not all the fossil evidence they found there, just what was discovered back in the late 70's... Apparently more bones have been discovered recently to back up the older data.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:03 pm |
    • Whyte Man

      You must be an expert in fossils and human anatomy. You should probably contact these experts and tell them they are wrong and why.
      Keep on knowing it all.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:14 pm |
    • Ca Ed

      Judges 15:16 (King James version)
      "And Samson said, With the jawbone of an ass, heaps upon heaps, with the jaw of an ass have I slain a thousand men."

      Kill 'em or confuse 'em, seems they are still doing the Lord's work with the same tools.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:28 pm |
      • Whyte Man

        (face palm)

        I suppose you can find something about dinosaur fossils as well.
        Old out dated book 12:21 (re-written version)
        "And the lordith did sayeth, I will ride my Velociraptor, with ninja sword in thy hand, smiting down non-believers where they stand. For the lord loves thee, and shows thee with no mercy. Amen."

        March 16, 2012 at 2:28 am |
  19. magneticink

    ...people with prominent brow ridges, thick skull bones, flat upper faces, broad noses, jutting jaws, and large molar teeth can be seen riding the NYC subways on any given day...

    March 15, 2012 at 6:52 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      John Rocker, how are you enjoying retirement from baseball?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:53 pm |
  20. Claude Gothic

    Kim Jong Un just threatened to engulf the Red Deer Cave people in a sea of fire if they ever try to invade North Korea.

    He also wants to know how Red Deer tastes.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:50 pm |
  21. JAMISON

    I have seen these creatures roaming the earth. They are called Republicans. Never learned much, stuck with old theories and ideas and continue to inter-marry.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:49 pm |
    • giggity

      funny

      March 15, 2012 at 6:57 pm |
    • giggity

      what would santorum say? not in the bible! dismissed sorry

      March 15, 2012 at 6:59 pm |
    • Sambo

      While liberals pat each other on the back for enacting legislation for gays to marry and legally b uttfu ck each other. Which is worse, I say the b uttfu cking by a nose...

      March 15, 2012 at 7:09 pm |
      • Rich

        @"Sambo" As much as it may threaten to drag you out of your closet (but hey, you already revealed your racism, so why stop hiding anything else?) it's actually quite legal to be in a relationship or have consensual s e x with people of your own gender. I'm sure you'll find this to be comforting in a few more years as you mature and come to terms with the answer to your aggression.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:27 pm |
    • Ron Harding

      Now that you mention it, I too have seen these creatures. There is a popular theory that they meet in small groups called “Republican Caucuses” and try their best to decide on a leader but without much success. I’m really surprised that they haven’t become extinct l-o-n-g ago as they aren’t very intelligent.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:07 pm |
      • Whyte Man

        The establishment loves people like you. You really think there is a difference between the dems and reps? They are all behind closed doors right now figuring out how to take more of your money. And they are laughing about it.

        March 16, 2012 at 2:41 am |
  22. Claude Gothic

    The scientists just realized that this guy was trying to assemble a nuke in his cave when somebody dropped a bomb in it.
    How topical!

    March 15, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
  23. jimmi

    I've seen this guy, doesn't he live in a cave called the white house?

    March 15, 2012 at 6:46 pm |
    • waitasec

      you're self defeating comments confirm that hate is alive and well

      March 15, 2012 at 6:52 pm |
    • Jt_flyer

      Another brilliant republican.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:53 pm |
      • Republican

        Yeah, they're easy to spot, because they're usually right on. Awesome observation skills there, libby.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:59 pm |
    • Susan

      I think you haven't evolved yet.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:59 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      We have this theory, see, that conservatives are inherently NOT funny.

      And the body of evidence which supports it is growing exponentially.

      Thanks for your contribution.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:59 pm |
      • Republican

        Because "funny" is the apex of intelligence, right? Good one, Gomer!

        March 15, 2012 at 7:02 pm |
      • Jadugara

        No Republican,...."funny" is at least a sign of intelligence, which you apparently lack....

        March 15, 2012 at 7:05 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        """Because "funny" is the apex of intelligence, right? Good one, Gomer!"""

        Geez, is it THAT OBVIOUS?

        Repub, just a heads up, bub. Don't start slinging insults. You're an amateur.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:16 pm |
      • Republican

        @Jeff, because you're the epitome of a pro? Pathetic fool.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:30 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        """Pathetic fool."""

        Outstanding attempt, but a fail. Rush 1.0 was the remedial version.

        You need to upgrade.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:36 pm |
      • Republican

        haha – now that was kind of funny. Sad that I get it, though.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:09 pm |
    • wrm

      Silly you, you are only allowed only to Republicans. Democrats are sacred.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:04 pm |
      • wrm

        to insult, that is

        March 15, 2012 at 7:05 pm |
  24. Captain Kirk

    looks like Rush Limbaugh with a tan. give it a cigar.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:46 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      Ditto!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:49 pm |
    • jim

      Oh, is that a cigar Limpballs sucks on?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:53 pm |
  25. Adnan Khan

    If proper DNA testing can be done it would be interesting to see it cross referenced against indigenous East Asian people both current and from the beginning of the Chinese dynasties to to see if any genetic material was contributed, just as the northern European humans and the neanderthals.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:45 pm |
    • Neanderthal

      If you google, it's not just Europeans that carry Neanderthal genes. Everyone other than Africans have 1-4% of neanderthal genome.

      March 16, 2012 at 12:13 am |
  26. ErnestoP

    It amazes me how these scientists never consider bone diseases as having caused malformations of the human skeleton in geographically isolated populations.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:43 pm |
    • MyTake

      Read the literature and find out. Why would you jump to such an unlikely conclusion?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:52 pm |
      • jim

        Bekuz it's agin the wurd uf the Lord!

        March 15, 2012 at 6:55 pm |
    • Aezel

      Yes I'm sure these incredibly educated anthropologists who are specifically trained to understand how skeletal structures work never thought of that. Boy who needs a P.h.D., when a 30 second glance at a web article makes you an expert!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:56 pm |
    • really

      And which disease would that be? I assume you are an expert?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:57 pm |
  27. JoJo

    He looks like the dude who mugged me on the subway in Chicago once. How the hell did he wind up in China?

    March 15, 2012 at 6:43 pm |
  28. wes

    oh ive seen people like this, its my rotten neighbors long lost family. looks just like them. and all of there kids look like this too.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:39 pm |
  29. Ashrakay

    I can only guess from the general silence from the usual-suspect creationists, that they haven't been told what to think yet and so therefore are awaiting further orders.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:37 pm |
    • john

      if anything, this discovery throws a kink into the theory of evolution. youre not as smart as you think you are

      March 15, 2012 at 6:43 pm |
      • Republican

        Exaaaaaaaaaactly.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:46 pm |
      • Henry

        How?

        March 15, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
      • MyTake

        What else would a know-nothing creationist say? LOL ... One the one hand they say we don't have enough intermediate forms ... now you are saying this throws a wrench in the works ... get your lies strait and we can address them one-by-one.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:50 pm |
      • Ashrakay

        @MyTake, Precisely my thoughts. Willful ignorance is so unbecoming.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:53 pm |
      • john

        oh and by the way, this is FAR from an "intermediate" form. it doesnt even contain human DNA. and its not "inbetween" anything.. if anything its an entirely new species, which brings with it a whole slew of other problems in the evolutionary formula. not sure why you guys are so angry at me for. i thought this was science?

        March 15, 2012 at 6:58 pm |
      • amaathya

        So is this Adam or Eve ?

        March 15, 2012 at 7:00 pm |
      • Mike

        Actually this doesn't in any way throw a kink into the theory of evolution. There are already a few different humanoid species and adding one would if anything reinforce evolution and natural selection. Of course if you ever made a true attempt to understand anything that goes against your delusional, dogmatic beliefs, then you might have an ever so slight understanding of this.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:01 pm |
    • Ashrakay

      @john, all this does is add to the mountain of evidence. Go read some books.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:47 pm |
    • john

      first off. if you call what we have a "mountain of evidence" then you should consider we came from aliens. we have much more "evidence" of that, in reference to your "mountains".. sounds ridiculous right? and im sorry to say, but you guys have been sold a bad bill of goods. the entire foundation behind evolution is rather shaky, even darwin in his later years spoke of the holes. i dont know why so many people have religiously adopted evolution as a truth. the only thing i can figure is they lump themselves in because its so "antireligious". but you know, you dont have to be so polarized on the issue. you can just admit the truth which is we still know nothing. we think we know how old the universe is and where it ends yet we have no clue whats even in our own oceans. mankind is so pretentious and arrogant.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:56 pm |
      • Ashrakay

        Expect a lot of laughs in response your post. Aside from being random and borderline incoherent, you basically outted yourself as someone who clearly has not studied the evidence behind the theory. Evidence that continues to grow every year. You're dismissing the fossil record, DNA evidence, genetic selection, man's intentional natural selection (e.g., how easy it is to transform dogs and bacteria), the geological record, tree records, radioactive isotope decay, the transformation of fetuses and so on... All for what? To maintain your fantasy that has zero evidence behind it.

        However, you still haven't said HOW this throws a kink into the theory of evolution. I, for one, am curious to hear this.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:04 pm |
      • George

        The evidence is pretty convincing. Evolution has been observed, even in humans. Go to a museum and walk through the armor exhibit. Notice how you (probably) are a good six inches taller than the suits of armor. That's evolution.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:04 pm |
      • Ashrakay

        @john, I see you made an attempt to explain how this throws a kink into the theory of evolution above. As @mike rightly points out, this is not the fist offshoot on the evolutionary tree. You would know this if you read and studied the evidence. Google "Neanderthals" but be forewarned, learnin' might ensue.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:13 pm |
  30. cvf

    Still alive. Bigfoot.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:36 pm |
    • Potcrock

      And living in the White House

      March 15, 2012 at 6:42 pm |
      • Republican

        haha!

        March 15, 2012 at 6:47 pm |
      • amaathya

        Not anymore man , they voted him out in 2008 :D

        March 15, 2012 at 7:01 pm |
      • Republican

        Some people are color blind, we forgive you.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:02 pm |
      • amaathya

        aaHa , so its all about colour isnt it , a little bit of melanin and off you go on your diatribe

        March 15, 2012 at 7:05 pm |
      • Jadugara

        Republican says: "Ha Ha,....gimme a beer!" *BURP*.... (scratches crotch)...

        What an I D I O T...

        March 15, 2012 at 7:11 pm |
      • Sam

        The interesting thing about someone who goes by a name like 'Republican' is you really can't tell if they hold the beliefs they state or if it is a troll parodying those beliefs...the reality and the parody are identical.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:15 pm |
      • Republican

        blah blah blah, typical libby insults. How surprising!

        March 15, 2012 at 7:31 pm |
  31. YBP

    Glad to watch science and reason continue to chip away at religion.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
    • JSR

      That's for sure.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:39 pm |
    • Republican

      Hardly.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:41 pm |
    • ilikecheese

      Both religion and science are accurate... they work in harmony. What I don't like is the people who get extreme on any side, like creationists and those people like you that believe religion is all crazy myths and such, and beyond reason.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:00 pm |
      • amaathya

        Exactly , this happens when religion moves away from Spirituality and enters the realm of politics.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:03 pm |
      • Marley

        Ok ... maybe not *all* religious dogmas are myths ... how about we agree that the majority of them are myths then!

        March 15, 2012 at 7:18 pm |
  32. Jason S

    Notice he has dark skin

    March 15, 2012 at 6:32 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      Give him a break, they hadn't invented shower heads or Irish Spring yet!!!!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:36 pm |
    • shootmyownfood

      Artist's rendering, doofus. Fossils rarely come with color-coding for the soft tissue.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:46 pm |
    • ilikecheese

      shut up racist

      March 15, 2012 at 7:06 pm |
    • Marley

      Dat right! Your ancestors used to be black!

      March 15, 2012 at 7:19 pm |
    • sonia

      strange, for people who claim to be educated,well rounded and civilized they start to behave like rabid animals when different views and opinions are shared. its always a battle of wits and words. white vs. black, republican vs. democrat, liberal vs. conservative and the list goes on...

      March 15, 2012 at 7:32 pm |
      • Republican

        It's the nature of human behavior. Everyone needs something to believe in, and therefor they need something to defend, and to add to that, they need something to attack. No form unity or same belief system will ever change that. Personally, I hate everyone, it just makes it a lot easier than having to deal with the rampant bi-polar epidemic.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:11 pm |
  33. Nofoldems

    Creationists: stay out of scientific discoveries and stick to you bible, your only source of truth.

    For rest of us: If in fact this is another species and dated at 15,000 years ago, it would have to be the most profound discovery–anthropological and archeological.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:31 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      Next, you're going to say that Patrick Ewing is a new species.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:36 pm |
    • Harland Sanders

      Wow! I think I just squirted some Santorem out of my butt!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:37 pm |
    • ch

      funny this will probably turn out to be another Ida (sloth) or Lucy (her bones where spread out over 1 square mile) maybe even another Nebraska Man (three pigs teeth) when science finds a real link let me know

      March 15, 2012 at 6:38 pm |
      • shootmyownfood

        You should really try reading the entire article before making snide comments. They're much better if you refer to "actual" statements.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:47 pm |
      • MyTake

        Very unlikely. There are teams of smart people with degree and education at work here. BTW, no scientist EVER said the "pigs tooth" was of a hominid. Another tired old lie from those who know nothing but are jealous of those with an education.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:56 pm |
    • YBP

      It's the fear of inevitable death that keeps them stupified and swearing up and down about the supernatural. Their pastors and their televangilists aren't complaining though. Believers keep throwing money at them, hoping that it will somehow guarantee the hereafter. it won't.

      Save your money. Think for yourself. Live for today. Create a legacy if you feel the need for immortality, like Beethoven and Michelangelo. Don't be afraid to die. It's going to be total lights out, and you will not even know it, just like before you were born, so don't be afraid.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:41 pm |
      • grist

        I like that idea. Thanks. For some of us who don't believe in gods, it is hard to think of death.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
    • john

      people who believe in god dont fear death. that doesnt make sense..

      March 15, 2012 at 6:46 pm |
      • shootmyownfood

        People who misbehave and believe in god fear death mightily.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
    • Republican

      Yeah, people aren't allowed to speak their minds in the new liberal world!

      March 15, 2012 at 7:04 pm |
  34. Tom

    As long as there are evangelical Christians there will be ignorance in abundance.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:30 pm |
    • Jim Stanek

      Just keep em abstinent long enough, and they'll go away. Heck, just make marriage illegal and they'll all die out in one generation :)

      March 15, 2012 at 6:32 pm |
    • Republican

      Don't worry, stupidity doesn't care who it infects. Look at you, for example.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:40 pm |
      • KernelD

        @ Republican.....drawing lines in the sand doesn't do anyone any good. You should try to actually think....there's a lot you don't understand. You're comments only reinforce the obvious.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:59 pm |
      • Republican

        If you don't draw lines in the sand, then you don't know where to cross. Glad my comments are reenforcing the obvious, though, I was hoping for that.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:09 pm |
      • Jadugara

        Drawing lines in the sand all day is about the best we can expect from poor, disenfranchised Republican, who is FAR happier blaming his woes on democrats and liberals that he is realizing that half of his (or her) problems stem from closed-mindedness and bigotry...

        Poor, poor Republican... He's about to cut off his own thums because he thnks "tool user" is an insult...

        March 15, 2012 at 7:17 pm |
      • Republican

        Jadugara, try again, you fail.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:40 pm |
    • YBP

      Yes, Tom, but they do have very wild imaginations. You have to marvel at what they think is possible. Unfortunately they are also quite violent and unreasonable. So the sooner the stupification where's off the better.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:44 pm |
    • MyTake

      I have not met one yet who is educated on the subjects they often question. Not to say they are not nice people or that they are not educated in other fields ... it is their mind-bending adherence to their literal interpretation of their faith which keeps them from seeing the light of reality.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:59 pm |
  35. Jim Stanek

    http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=X&biw=1366&bih=644&tbm=isch&tbnid=_hSryqtasDJPtM:&imgrefurl=http://www.quotecollection.com/author/redd-foxx/&docid=5NrFE0Eor07OrM&imgurl=http://www.quotecollection.com/author-images/redd-foxx-3.jpg&w=234&h=236&ei=IGxiT47KKrPMiQK35L3ACA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=659&vpy=179&dur=4945&hovh=188&hovw=187&tx=72&ty=113&sig=111685764290196202661&page=1&tbnh=120&tbnw=115&start=0&ndsp=27&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0

    March 15, 2012 at 6:26 pm |
  36. James

    Hey he looks like my uncle bukbu...cool

    March 15, 2012 at 6:24 pm |
  37. Claude Gothic

    I heard the scientists were captured by a primitive local tribe and made to choose between death and Bundah.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:24 pm |
  38. jim

    hmmmm look closely at the face, looks like a politician with a beard to me.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:22 pm |
  39. Jim Stanek

    So you're telling us the Red Deer Cave People look like Redd Foxx?? f ing awesome!!

    March 15, 2012 at 6:22 pm |
    • Knucklehead

      This just in.... Lamont Man and Rollo Man were discovered nearby...

      March 15, 2012 at 6:46 pm |
  40. Claude Gothic

    Did they find primitive hair trimmers in the cave? That guy's hair and beard are looking pretty sweet.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:22 pm |
  41. Jim Stanek

    So the Red Cave People look like...Redd Foxx? F-in awesome, CNN!

    March 15, 2012 at 6:21 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      I could stick your face in dough and make gorilla cookies.

      I could stick your face in batter and make ugly muffins!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:23 pm |
  42. lizza

    Hey isn't that Uncle Ben.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:21 pm |
    • clearfog

      I see that you were able to rice to the occasion.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:28 pm |
  43. dakota2000

    Am I the only one that notice? This was posted on the front page of CNN next to an unrelated article about Joe Biden. The resemblance is remarkable!

    March 15, 2012 at 6:20 pm |
  44. Bear

    I just hope these red deer people had to pay for their contraception herbs

    March 15, 2012 at 6:20 pm |
  45. Claude Gothic

    If Australians were involved in the dig, I'll bet that cave is full of crushed Foster's cans now...

    March 15, 2012 at 6:20 pm |
  46. Rich

    An absolutely awesome comment, enjoyed reading every word.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:19 pm |
  47. Zero

    It's Obama's Fault.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:19 pm |
  48. Peter M - Nova Scotia

    This article is riddled with grammatical errors. So much so that I found it painful to continue reading it. This lowers my respect for anything appearing on the CNN website.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:19 pm |
    • kenkatth

      I noticed the MANY grammatical errors as well. In fact, I had to re-read some of those sentences, because I couldn't believe how badly this was written!!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:27 pm |
    • Really...

      CBC sucks!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:28 pm |
    • Adam

      BLAME CANADA

      March 15, 2012 at 6:40 pm |
    • MrsFizzy

      Was it written by Red Deer Caveman?

      March 15, 2012 at 8:39 pm |
  49. Ian

    If I read anything else about God, The Devil, or Jesus I fear that our civilization is dumber than I anticipated...You might as well believe that Harry Potter was Real too...Stop following cults and other people's beliefs...its not healthy!

    March 15, 2012 at 6:13 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      If Harry Potter's not real, who was that guy running around naked on Broadway???

      March 15, 2012 at 6:16 pm |
    • tonysgirl1959

      O ye of little faith.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:21 pm |
    • anti-Ian

      Soooo, you would rather we follow what scientists say. Isn't that still following after what other ppl say?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:21 pm |
      • YBP

        Ancient beliefs and scientific discovories are two vastly different things.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:27 pm |
      • Junior

        Scientific method = objective fact-based reasoning approach

        Faith = suspend reasoning and believe

        Each has a place, but they are hardly equivalent.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:30 pm |
      • john

        "Faith = suspend reasoning and believe".. that is so far from what 'faith' is, its no wonder so many people mock it. such a lack of understanding. its mind boggling.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:47 pm |
  50. roccop777

    As a creationist I don't see old bones or fossils as a conspiracy of the devil - but remains of creatures which once lived. Until Nicolas Steno - the father of modern paleontology and a creationist as well - came along, the majority of the the scientific community since the classic greeks, thought that fossils were evidence of inanimate matter in the process of developing into life forms. So the scientific community should be thankful for creationist researchers.

    So, the bones are clearly the remains of a human being - but the depiction of the dark skin color (strange, I thought evolutionists finally got beyond calling dark-skinned people "primitive"), the hairy body - how they got those details from bones encased in sediment rock, they need to explain. I imagine these details are embellishments from artists and researchers with pre-conceived assumptions. I have seen various depictions of Heidelberg Man, Cro-magnon man etc. with wildly differing skin colors and hair type - based on baseless guessing. That is not science!
    If a lot of body hair means more primitive, then Armenians, Georgians, Turks are a primitive species of humans. If a larger brow-ridge means more primitive, then Ukrainians (like the heavyweight boxers – Klitschenko. But one has a PhD!) and a lot of other slavic peoples are primitive. In the 1920's – 1940's evolutionists used a method called "Phrenology" using the form and sloping of the skull to determine how primitive a race of people was. The Nazis loved this "scientific" method. Back then when creationists objected to these assumptions and as result were mocked as "idiots afraid of science."
    Oh, and the dating - unless this human being was carrying around a calender in his back pocket, these are also based on assumptions. All radiometric dating methods need to be calibrated - and these are based on the assumption that decay rates we now observe have always been constant. However we have much empirical evidence that this assumption is not accurate. It is common to use variouis radiometric dating methods which result in wildly differing dates.
    I have no problem with the discovery of fossils and old bones - but the ideological storytelling which surrounds it.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:13 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      Turns out they found his wallet with the bones and just checked the photos.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:15 pm |
    • Ashrakay

      "Primitive" is a scientific term of classification like neg.roid. It's not intended as insult.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:17 pm |
    • Dex

      I concur with your comments, completely.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:28 pm |
    • YBP

      You lost me at "as a creationist."

      March 15, 2012 at 6:29 pm |
      • JT

        That was a very narrow minded reply.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:10 pm |
    • Dr.K.

      roccup, with all due respect, you are fundamentally mistaken about quite a number of things....

      March 15, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
    • kentuckyscience.com

      If God created something from nothing, then both something and nothing would be apart of him. The problem is that something and nothing are total opposites. Like good and evil. Nothing is associated with no movement, something is associated with movement and to be both would be like saying that truth and lies are the same. If God created something from nothing, he would not be a jealous God because he could easily turn something back into nothing. The point here is that no scripture in the Bible specifically states that God created something from nothing. Science is promoting it and the church is beginning to accept it.
      Finite Universe – zero and one are equal (matter can be infinitely divided into nothing – God is Nothing that created everything out of emptiness) "At the Planck distance and the Planck time all physics, as we know it today collapses. This is the reason we call the beginning of the big bang a singularity. You cannot apply ordinary reasoning there. Zero and one have no sense there.OK?" There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind that the Big Bang views one and zero as being equal, since it states that zero appeared out of the absence of zero; then zero created something. Many scientists believe or have faith that light does not have mass, thus they believe the Universe is Finite. Religion promotes the most commonly accepted idea of the group. If light does not have mass, then it would be impossible to move an electron. Light described as a particle means nothing, if it has no mass since it would be impossible to distinguish from nothing because no mass means void of substance. If it has no substance, then nothing is present to distinguish the particle from other particles.
      The Big Bang theory prevents any condition where something has always been. Infinity is defined as the difference between one and zero. Once one and zero are the same according to the big bang, the definition of infinity as stated above is no longer valid. If the big bang occurred, all math's must deal with the proof of 0=1.

      Infinite Universe – zero is not equal to one (there is a point where matter can't be divided – God is Something that can neither be created nor destroyed that is dependent on nothing.) An infinite universe lacks a beginning, so there is no one set past or a given future. Therefore the principles of human evolution from an insane species require a virgin birth of Adam and Eve for the establishment of a moral and just human government (Isaiah 9:6).

      March 15, 2012 at 6:38 pm |
    • clearfog

      What is the basis for your statement that the decay rate of Carbon 14 is not constant? The decay rate is well understood and is uncontroversial. The fact that you have to raise a question concerning a physical constant demonstrates the weakness of your argument. And tell be again how creationist researchers advanced any science. The theory of spontaneous generation was abandoned decades ago and not as a result of any creationist researchers. BTW – spontaneous generation sure sounds a lot like Adam from clay and Eve from a rib.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:39 pm |
    • M-Theory

      I think just about every scientist that uses carbon dating would dispel your misinformation. Explain how carbon isotopes can age sporadically please. .. without spinning and rephrasing Wikipedia.

      Why must you look for holes in evolution? Why can't evolution exist within the context of god and the bible? Do you really beleive the literal words as fact?

      I'm sorry to say that unless you can reconcile evolution and a 4-billion year old earth.... you'll be remembered in history as the flat-earth society. Scientists using the same technology that you rely upon, can prove the new reality.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:39 pm |
    • Andrew

      People from southern china and northern africa tend to be darker skinned than european counterparts, simply because of the climate and geography. It has nothing to do with 'primitive' or not. Melinin production helps protect against the sun, so you would find that in areas that get more sunlight, people tend to have darker skin.

      And the artist drawings on CNN are not the same descriptions of the skull on the actual journal page. If you want to read about how they physically removed the skull from rocks, feel free to read the actual article, but I'd imagine they used standard paleontological digging practices.

      And you really don't seem to understand what 'primitive' means. Body hair, skin color, they're not indicitive of if an organism is 'primitive' or not, rather, AGE determines it. You're adopting a Aristotlean view, where species are either 'higher' or 'lower' on a ladder, but rather, ANY MODERN SPECIES is as advanced as it gets. Any two humans, any shark, any bacteria, they're all as advanced as any other species simply because they outlived all of their 'primitive ancestors'. Now, you may find organisms that share charactaristics with primitive species, but that's kinda like saying
      "Americans and Europeans both come from Europe. Thus Europeans are more primitive than Americans because Europeans share more in common with old Europeans than Americans do".

      It's meaningless in an evolutionary context. As for radiometric dating, the 'wildly different dates' generally agree with each other fairly well, you won't get exact years, but different methods have different constraints and error bars. For example, it's impossible to use lead-lead dating on things a couple thousand years old because the half life is so long that not enough has decayed to provide measurable results. On the other hand, radiocarbon dating is great for finds less than 50 thousand years old because enough carbon-14 has decayed as to be measurable, but not enough has decayed as to be undetectable. With a shorter half life as well, it's easier to put tighter constraints on age. Now, it's not perfect, and tends to be especially bad to date things like sea creatures, which get most of their carbon from already depleated carbon, rather than atmospheric, but researchers are well aware of these limitations and seek to avoid them.

      Believe it or not, you are less educated on the process of digging up fossils, and less aware of the flaws in potential methodology, than the scientists themselves are. You can point to as many percieved holes as you think there exist, but at the end of the day, you are still playing armchair scientist, and no more qualified to comment on the merits of this, than you are to comment on the merits of a Higgs signal at 120GeV.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:42 pm |
    • Adam

      I wouldn't go around telling people you are a creationist, You might as well walk around with a T-Shirt that says, I am a complete moron.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:43 pm |
    • szerin

      Swing and a miss! There is no scientific weight in the artist's subjective reconstruction. This depiction was provided to make the science more accessible to those who do not understand the scientific process and is merely a best guess depiction of what this early hominid might have looked like. You will find no such depiction in the actual journal article. The objective criteria used to evaluate the bones themselves are what matter here and these characteristics are provided in excruciating detail in the paper. Even a cursory examination of the skull leaves little doubt that this is not a modern human. As for criticizing the radiocarbon dating, that is a red herring. You should note that the dating is provided as a range, which accounts for uncertainty. Please read the paper so that you can see what is published in the actual scientific community, and base your criticisms on that paper, not the journalistic fluff here that is used to appease sixth grade readership.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:49 pm |
    • ReasonableXX

      You didn't make one reasonable or logical argument in your entire post.

      First of all until Darwin, everyone was a creationist of some type. So logic follows that creationist scientists would obviously have had to play a role in early scientific progress. Also the beliefs of anyone are not evidence of anything. Basically, it is irrelevant to the argument at hand to say what scientist's used to believe. Science is based on a progression of ideas and theories that lead to the truth. Science may not be exactly right today, but it is a lot closer to truth than it used to be.

      Artistic depictions are not scientific and they never claim to be. You are focusing on an unimportant detail to distract from the overall importance of the discover. Of course the exact appearance of soft tissue will never be known. That doesn't mean that the anatomical structure of the bones is suddenly meaningless.

      I'll bypass your racist comments as well as the Nazi references. What little point you were trying to make was addressed in my first paragraph.

      Finally radiometric dating is incredibly accurate to within a few decade when elements with the proper half-life for the time period being measured is used.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:58 pm |
    • rickwh

      Finally someone who can add to these articles who actually possesses some intelligence. I do not believe in creationism as I am an agnostic, but I do respect the opinions of others who disagree with my point of view. Roccop777 brings up many valid points on how throughout history, many attempts were made to explain the existence of fossils. Even though I believe that evolution explains the existence of all known fossils, I found it refreshing to read this post and seriously ponder a different explanation.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:14 pm |
      • Andrew

        No, he really doesn't, he brings up arguments that sound good if you haven't bothered to study evolutionary theory at all. That's sorta like having someone point out "flaws" with classical electrodynamics because they studied circuits in high school, and have no concept of what Maxwell's equations are, or how to solve a differential equation.

        It's playing armchair scientist with no background in the subject. You might think the arguments are valid, but the more you study the subject, the more silly they prove themselves to be. Evolutionary biologists tend to be vastly better educated both on the limitations, and the procedures, of their discipline than armchair scientists or creationists. In that sense, you'll rarely find a person who comes up with a truly cogent argument that hasn't been throughly trashed hundreds of times over among the actual academic literature.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:38 pm |
    • Yakobi

      The fundamental problem with creationism, roccop777, is there are no gods or goddesses, demons or devils, ghosts or goblins. Religion was invented by man to control the masses.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:21 pm |
    • brobin

      Calling someone a creationist who died 150 years or so before Darwin's theory on Evolution is a bit rich. Based on his constant questioning of both his religious beliefs and science, there is no reason to believe he wouldn't have believed in Darwin's Theory on Evolution.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:57 pm |
  51. Claude Gothic

    Turns out they actually finally figured out where Jimmy Hoffa is buried...move on, people, nothing to see here.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:13 pm |
  52. Religion is so not myth..Idiots!

    It all happened just like all the good books say. Snake talking, Yup happend. I know, I was there. Actually, I am God, The almighty. Thats me folks. I spend my time in Denver watching chicks, skiing, and going to great shows. Luv the Darwin Bashers, They are really helping my cause as I sit back roll one up this fat one for the chair lift........Fossils are a complete joke man. I just put them them there so all these people who hate the church and all other religions, as a kind of joke on them to think they figured it all out. PROVE THAT I DID NOT PUT THE BONES THERE. Non of you can, because I am the almighty God and I want the church to not pay taxes and stuff like that.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:12 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      If you're God, how come I saw you fall on your rear trying to ski Giant Steps at Vail? It's only a black!!!!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:14 pm |
      • Religion is so myth....Not, yes, not

        Actually, I have been parting in the Backbowls of Breckenridge: As a humble god, I dont like to hang with the Vail crowd to often, it goes to thier heads, they have cash. Breckenridge a little more down to earth really.......And the chicks are better looking cause they are fresh out of colledge. God loves hotties....but you knew that.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:33 pm |
      • Claude Gothic

        Can you magically create new skis and boots for me?

        March 15, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
    • scotty307

      For one who created all languages and forms of communication you have horrible typing skills.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:50 pm |
  53. Xenophon

    Interesting article, but they need to proofread it first.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:12 pm |
    • Religion is so myth....Not, yes, not

      Was still more fun then reading a bible.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
  54. xraydeltafoxtrot

    "... had short flat faces, lack a moden human-like chin, have thick skull bones, a rounded brain case, prominent brow ridges, and a moderate size brain." – If my boss ever turns up missing, the police can put out an All Points Bulletin using this description – I won't need to add or change a thing.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:11 pm |
  55. bobbsy

    oh dear FSM, the writing of this article is terrible! Where's the copy editor?

    March 15, 2012 at 6:10 pm |
    • Xenophon

      I agree. I should have read your post before sounding off.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:13 pm |
    • Michael J.

      You should look at your own writing (such as, maybe you should capitalize your sentences) before criticizing others, dingbat.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:15 pm |
      • nadine

        i tink me gramar and speling iz very goood and wish everybudy rite like me.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:25 pm |
  56. leon

    I think you found Fred Sanford he came up missing in 1977

    March 15, 2012 at 6:09 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      Rollo killed him for drug money!!!
      After he was shot, Fred said, "Lizabeth...this is the big one, honey...the big hole in my chest!!!"

      March 15, 2012 at 6:11 pm |
  57. Steve

    I know some people that look like this.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:09 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      A bit like a balding Ron Jeremy...

      March 15, 2012 at 6:11 pm |
  58. kissyface

    so they shaved a conservitives but and taught him to walk backwards.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:07 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      Then he tripped, fell on the bones, and smashed them all. The scientists went to KFC and saved the leftovers to replace them.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:10 pm |
  59. Josh

    Not all creationist dismiss evolution...just young earth creationism. Evolution doesn't contradict the Bible or Christianity. It's nauseating that people dismiss science, because they feel it threatens their God. If you truly believe in God, you shoud realize that he doesn't need your protection.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:02 pm |
    • Colin

      Whether you push it back to 4.5B years ago or 13.72B years ago, it is still creationism. "I don't know" does not equal [the Judeo-Christian] god and never will.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
      • U B Misguided

        Colin

        "Whether you push it back to 4.5B years ago or 13.72B years ago, it is still creationism. "I don't know" does not equal [the Judeo-Christian] god and never will."

        Right, lets just label it a "theory" like science does, that way we don't have to offer proof of anything, and we can mock everyone else who doesn't agree with us., and DEMAND proof of those practicing faith (plz define faith if you can) Your SUPER GENIUS ways are starting to make sense. With Science, you never *have* to be right, you can always fall back on "We just didn't understand" – no apologies for your arrogant, blindly following what someone else tells you statements... you get off scott free for being a complete and utter ass. Nice Plan!

        March 19, 2012 at 3:10 pm |
    • JeffinIL

      Amazing that some "believers" don't think that the being that created the entire universe can take care of Himself.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:05 pm |
    • darwin

      Evolution is SCIENCE. It trumps all religion by definition. Stop putting your head in the sand.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:09 pm |
      • Josh

        Did you even read my comment? I believe in EVOLUTION and SCIENCE and GOD.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:12 pm |
      • tio

        Evolution is a religion. It's called "the THEORY of Evolution". Religions cannot be proven and neither can Evolution. No top scientist today believes in Darwinian (your name's sake) evolution. Read up on the "evolution" of Evolution.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:21 pm |
      • Ashrakay

        @tio, Quite ignorant. I recommend a healthy dose of edjukashion.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:32 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        """Evolution is a religion. It's called "the THEORY of Evolution"."""

        Tio, Tio, Tio.... Poor Tio. Don't pretend to know anything about science. Your remarks place you squarely in the ignorant column. You are simply not qualified in this debate.

        Please do yourself a favor and subscribe to Popular Science or Scientific American and read it. Also, please understand that your understanding of scientific "theory" is wrong.

        WRONG.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:36 pm |
      • scotty307

        Tio, could you explain the THEORY of Jesus to me?

        March 15, 2012 at 6:53 pm |
  60. Claude Gothic

    I hear that Mr. Red Deer Cave is planning to come to the US to get his PhD and then buy a condo, Camry, and nice camera.

    March 15, 2012 at 6:00 pm |
  61. Joe

    All fake. Everyone knows the world was created in 6 days roughly 6,000 years ago. These scientists don't know what they're talking about. Full of their fancy book learning. I've got a book for you to read..it's called THE BIBLE!!!! You're going to Hell if you believe this article!!!!

    March 15, 2012 at 6:00 pm |
    • Colin

      Thanks Mr. Santorum

      March 15, 2012 at 6:01 pm |
      • U B Misguided

        So... some think I am picking on Colon, and I apologize for that.

        The real problem I have with the scientific blow-hards is twofold. 1. they spew rhetoric from someone else's research/work, never bothering to do their own, and 2. the complete lack of accountability with science in general. Once the *current* science is disproved, they just glom onto the next accepted answer until it's proven wrong, etc.etc. (anyone remember our little lost planet Pluto?) , yet there is no shortage of faith bashing, and name calling to those that believe is a supreme creator.

        Remember Colon (and other (cough cough) *scientific* hard liners – When science is wrong (and its not an IF, it is WHEN) there are no consequences because you will just jump on the next bandwagon. But when your wrong about GOD, there are eternal consequences that no amount of scientific reasoning will be able to over come.

        March 19, 2012 at 3:36 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      That guy at the top of the article WROTE that book you like so much!!!!
      Using deer blood!!!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:01 pm |
    • JeffinIL

      Warning! Sarcasm Detection has been turned off.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:02 pm |
    • Wut

      Not sure if trolling or retarded.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
    • Twostones

      Now can i have my snake back?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:09 pm |
    • Alan

      Joe, perhaps you should read the Bible to learn about the New Coventant.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:17 pm |
      • YBP

        You should follow your own advice and do some reading yourself. At the library. Not at church.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:33 pm |
    • Bill

      Joe really

      March 15, 2012 at 6:31 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      """All fake. Everyone knows the world was created in 6 days roughly 6,000 years ago. These scientists don't know what they're talking about. Full of their fancy book learning. I've got a book for you to read..it's called THE BIBLE!!!! You're going to Hell if you believe this article!!!!"""

      This is sarcasm. Right? RIGHT? Surely you can't mean this. After all, it's 2012 for cryin' out loud.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:38 pm |
    • scotty307

      Joe, all people who think God created this world as it is are clearly just fooling themselves. As the son of a preacher and spending my life in church and learning the bible also a geologist and trained in the inner working of the Earth, It just seems arrogant to me that we think that we know what God was thinking when he created earth. If he is all knowing then he would know that all beings need to change as the earth changes. A perfect creation is one that can change and EVOLVE on its own. How bored would GOD be if he couldn't watch us develop and be the perfect creation, much as parents watch their children EVOLVE into adults.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:59 pm |
  62. JeffinIL

    Monkey Man!!!!

    March 15, 2012 at 5:58 pm |
  63. albert

    Yawn, sounds like grant money is up for grabs. More scientific lies to follow...

    March 15, 2012 at 5:58 pm |
    • clearfog

      Yawning is a physical mechanism for supplying more oxygen to the brain. Sometimes it doesn't work.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:02 pm |
      • darwin

        haha

        March 15, 2012 at 6:11 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        Excellent...

        March 15, 2012 at 6:39 pm |
    • Bucky

      Yes all lies. Like when they discovered the earth orbited the sun. All lies.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:02 pm |
      • Claude Gothic

        The sun is actually a guy driving a really shiny chariot!!!!

        March 15, 2012 at 6:05 pm |
    • Andrew

      One does not get into evolutionary biology for the grant money. There isn't very much of it 'up for grabs'. Evolutionary biologists do not tend to be rich. Most of that grant money is eaten up for things like 'paying people to help dig up a site'.

      Only a fool would think scientists go "you know what, I want to get into a poorly paid field of biology to study this made up theory of evolution and compete for rather tiny amounts of grants just to keep this conspiricy alive". Seriously, creationists are like people who deny the moon landing, it's all a conspiricy to them.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:10 pm |
    • HappyMadison

      You mean like all those scientific lies that led to the internet, and personal computers so that you could post how science is nothing but lies?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:14 pm |
  64. Capiers

    I'll wait for the final DNA results, of course the prelim tests had no signs of Human DNA. It could be as simple as they found bones from both human and ape in the same location and began assembling a human like skull.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm |
    • Patrick

      All primates have signs of human DNA, and vice-versa.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:00 pm |
    • clearfog

      Those dummy scientists probably threw in a few parts of a deer skull too. Maybe you should submit a peer review. Science will be benefited from your analysis.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
      • Claude Gothic

        No wonder they said these cave men were really horney!!!

        March 15, 2012 at 6:07 pm |
      • Sandy G

        I don't understand how they can say "did not show evident of human DNA ". If you compare the insulin molecules of chimapanzees and humans, they are essentially the same. If you compare the gene preotein coding sequence (cDNA) they are essentially the same. So that statement doesn't make any sense. So we are close to chimpanzees than to the Red Dear Cave people? (A clear case of convergent evolution, I suppose.)

        March 15, 2012 at 6:42 pm |
  65. Scott who can Write

    Good Lord, who is writing these articles? CNN get some quality control please! The grammar, commas, sentence structure... EVERYTHING is ugly! I feel like I'm reading a 12 year old's writing! Don't you have people to proof-read these things?

    March 15, 2012 at 5:56 pm |
    • okeydokey

      The article was written by the red deer cave man,

      March 15, 2012 at 6:15 pm |
  66. cpc65

    No, no, no. I just saw this guy driving a cab the other day. He even cut me off.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      When he gave you the bird, did you notice if he had an opposable thumb??

      March 15, 2012 at 6:02 pm |
  67. b

    To summarize the responses here: It looks like whomever I hate the most. Also, it either proves my own beliefs or it is a bunch of bullcrud.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
  68. Polymath

    "Initial DNA testing conducted on the fossils did not show evident of human DNA..."

    evidence

    "Despite, Asia being the largest subcontinent the fossil record for human evolution remains slim. The vast majority of pre-historic archeology has focused on Europe and Africa, scientists say."

    Archaeology deals with artifacts. Osteology and physical anthropology deal with old human bones.

    This writer not only has poor grammar, spelling, syntax, and style, he or she also has a very poor grasp of the subject matter.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:54 pm |
    • tbotz

      let's read your article.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
    • HappyMadison

      tl;dr

      March 15, 2012 at 6:19 pm |
    • MrsFizzy

      But most people are just here to comment on the picture.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:42 pm |
      • MrsFizzy

        ...and the President, and creationism and crazy sh!t.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:44 pm |
  69. Capiers

    "Their skulls are anatomically unique. They look very different to all modern humans..." This is because the person/s that reassembled the skull did a poor job. I saw the images of the skull, you can clearly see in the jaw area where the bone was reattached improperly. I remember this type of thing happening with Dinosaur bones. They thought they discovered a new Dino only to realize they assembled the bones incorrectly. You see what you want to see.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:52 pm |
    • Polymath

      And exactly what scientific qualifications do you have and by what epistemology do you come to this conclusion? Are you a paleoanthropologist who has examined the bones?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:01 pm |
    • Claude Gothic

      I heard they accidentally put one of his femurs coming straight out of the front of his pelvis and then named him "Long Duc Dong".

      March 15, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
  70. Colin

    Apologies up front if you have seen this before. I post it often in an effort to reach some (young) minds who have been inculcated with the knuckle-dragging garbage of creationism before they were old enough to reject it as totally nonsensical.

    To get a gauge of just how inane the belief in intelligent design is in the 21st Century, here are some areas they must ignore, any one of which proves beyond rational argument that, not surprisingly, the World did not start about 6,000 years ago at the behest of the Judeo-Christian god, with one man, one woman and a talking snake.

    First and most obviously is the fossil record. The fossil record is much, much more than just dinosaurs. Indeed, dinosaurs only get the press because of their size, but they make up less than 1% of the entire fossil record. Life had been evolving on Earth for over 3 thousand million years before dinosaurs evolved and has gone on evolving for 65 million years after the Chicxulub meteor wiped them out.

    The fossil record includes the Stromatolites, colonies of prokaryotic bacteria, that range in age going back to about 3 billion years, the Ediacara fossils from South Australia, widely regarded as among the earliest multi-celled organisms, the Cambrian species of the Burgess shale in Canada (circa – 450 million years) the giant scorpions of the Silurian Period, the giant, wingless insects of the Devonian period, the insects, amphibians, reptiles; fishes, clams, crustaceans of the Carboniferous Period, the many precursors to the dinosaurs, the dinosaurs themselves, the subsequent dominant mammals, including the saber tooth tiger, the mammoths of North America and Asia, the fossils of early man in Africa and the Neanderthals of Europe.

    The fossil record shows a consistent and worldwide evolution of life on Earth dating back to about 3,500,000,000 years ago. There are literally millions of fossils that have been recovered, of thousands of different species and they are all located where they would be in the geological record if life evolved slowly over billions of years. None of them can be explained by a 6,000 year old Earth and Noah’s flood. Were they all on the ark? What happened to them when it docked?

    Lions, tigers, bears, and wolves eat a lot of food – meat- which means its food would itself have to have been fed, like the food of every other carnivore on the ark (including carniverous dinosaurs). A bit of “back of the envelope” math quickly shows that “Noah’s Ark” would actually have to have been an armada of ships bigger than the D Day invasion force, manned by thousands and thousands of people – and this is without including the World’s 300,000 current species of plants, none of which could walk merrily in twos onto the Ark.

    Secondly, there are those little things we call oil, natural gas and other fossil fuels. Their mere existence is another, independent and fatal blow to the creationists. Speak to any geologist who works for Exxon Mobil, Shell or any of the thousands of mining, oil or natural gas related companies that make a living finding fossil fuels. They will tell you these fossil fuels take millions of years to develop from the remains of large forests (in the case of coal) or tiny marine creatures (in the case of oil). That’s why they are called fossil fuels. Have a close look at coal, you can often see the fossilized leaves in it. The geologists know exactly what rocks to look for fossil fuels in, because they know how to date the rocks to millions of years ago. Creationists have no credible explanation for this (nor for why most of it was “given to the Muslims”).

    Thirdly, most of astronomy and cosmology would be wrong if the creationists were right. In short, as Einstein showed, light travels at a set speed. Space is so large that light from distant stars takes many years to reach the Earth. In some cases, this is millions or billions of years. The fact that we can see light from such far away stars means it began its journey billions of years ago. The Universe must be billions of years old. We can currently see galaxies whose light left home 13.7 billion years ago. Indeed, on a clear night, one can see many stars more than 6,000 light years away with the naked eye, shining down like tiny silent witnesses against the nonsense of creationism.

    Fourthly, we have not just carbon dating, but also all other methods used by scientists to date wood, rocks, fossils, and other artifacts. These comprehensively disprove the Bible’s claims. They include uranium-lead dating, potassium-argon dating as well as other non-radioactive methods such as pollen dating, dendrochronology and ice core dating. In order for any particular rock, fossil or other artifact to be aged, generally two or more samples are dated independently by two or more laboratories in order to ensure an accurate result. If results were random, as creationists claim, the two independent results would rarely agree. They generally do. They regularly reveal ages much older than Genesis. Indeed, the Earth is about 750,000 times older than the Bible claims.

    Fifthly, the relatively new field of DNA mapping not only convicts criminals, it shows in undeniable, full detail how we differ from other life forms on the planet. For example, about 98.4% of human DNA is identical to that of chimpanzees, about 97% of human DNA is identical to that of gorillas, and slightly less again of human DNA is identical to the DNA of monkeys. This gradual divergence in DNA can only be rationally explained by the two species diverging from a common ancestor, and coincides perfectly with the fossil record. Indeed, scientists can use the percentage of DNA that two animal share (such as humans and bears, or domestic dogs and wolves) to get an idea of how long ago the last common ancestor of both species lived. It perfectly corroborates the fossil record and is completely independently developed. It acts as yet another fatal blow to the “talking snake” theory.

    Sixthly, the entire field of historical linguistics would have to be rewritten to accommodate the Bible. This discipline studies how languages develop and diverge over time. For example, Spanish and Italian are very similar and have a recent common “ancestor” language, Latin, as most people know. However, Russian is quite different and therefore either did not share a common root, or branched off much earlier in time. No respected linguist anywhere in the World traces languages back to the Tower of Babel, the creationists’ explanation for different languages. Indeed, American Indians, Australian Aboriginals, “true” Indians, Chinese, Mongols, Ja.panese, Sub-Saharan Africans and the Celts and other tribes of ancient Europe were speaking thousands of different languages thousands of years before the date creationist say the Tower of Babel occurred – and even well before the date they claim for the Garden of Eden.

    Seventhly, lactose intolerance is also a clear vestige of human evolution. Most mammals only consume milk as infants. After infancy, they no longer produce the enzyme “lactase” that digests the lactose in milk and so become lactose intolerant. Humans are an exception and can drink milk as adults – but not all humans – some humans remain lactose intolerant. So which humans are no longer lactose intolerant? The answer is those who evolved over the past few thousand years raising cows. They evolved slightly to keep producing lactase as adults so as to allow the consumption of milk as adults. This includes most Europeans and some Africans, notably the Tutsi of Rwanda. On the other hand, most Chinese, native Americans and Aboriginal Australians, whose ancestors did not raise cattle, remain lactose intolerant.

    I could go on and elaborate on a number of other disciplines or facts that creationists have to pretend into oblivion to retain their faith, including the Ice Ages, cavemen and early hominids, much of microbiology, paleontology and archeology, continental drift and plate tectonics, even large parts of medical research (medical research on monkeys and mice only works because they share a common ancestor with us and therefore our fundamental cell biology and basic body architecture is identical to theirs).

    In short, and not surprisingly, the World’s most gifted evolutionary biologists, astronomers, cosmologists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologists, historians, modern medical researchers and linguists (and about 2,000 years of accu.mulated knowledge) are right and a handful of Iron Age Middle Eastern goat herders were wrong.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:52 pm |
    • newbie

      Great article! Thanks!

      March 15, 2012 at 5:59 pm |
    • Ashrakay

      I find the history deniers are usually able to be grouped into 1 of 2 categories: ignorant and willfully ignorant. There is hope for the ignorant, but very little hope for the willfully ignorant. With the overwhelming amount of evidence to prove the theory of evolution as fact, I fear most fall into the willfully ignorant category. My feeling is that they cling to this ignorance either because the truth is inconvenient or uncomfortable, or because this story they've created makes them feel special in some way. This means they are basing their conclusions on fear or ego. It's really hard to battle past that in a person to help them see the truth.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:13 pm |
    • bobbio

      Wow, that was impressive. It was longer than the original article! However, you took all that time to logically explain science to people that don't think logically. I give you an A for effort, but I doubt the nay-sayers will even read the whole thing (too many big words and too much thinking involved). Too bad you can't get those several minutes of your life back...

      March 15, 2012 at 6:17 pm |
    • dakota2000

      Great. Thanks for posting this. Hope it makes a difference.

      But there is one additional point: Creationism seems like a atavistic trait... a kind of de-evolving of the human mind...

      March 15, 2012 at 6:19 pm |
    • Rich

      An awesome comment, enjoyed reading every word.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:20 pm |
    • TeaParty4Eva

      Stroma who? Proca whatsit? If it ain't about Jesus it's just a bunch of bs to me!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:23 pm |
    • Stork

      Nice Work!!! This should be required reading for every religious nut bag walking the planet!!! Going to print this out for my Mom!!!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:30 pm |
    • Jack Watcher

      A very comprehensive and clearly stated review of many of the arguments debunking creationism. Now, what do you bet that the religious amongst us say "I don't care, it's in the Bible, you are wrong ". Sad but true. Thanks, nonetheless, for the effort.

      March 15, 2012 at 7:13 pm |
    • dakota2000

      Is this on a permanent website any where? I want to share it with everyone! The arguments are brilliant!

      March 15, 2012 at 7:43 pm |
    • rimhammer

      Evolved people can drink milk.
      I guess that would make anyone who believes in any religion; lactose intolerant.

      Great article!
      The world needs to be told of the facts and evidence!

      March 16, 2012 at 3:17 am |
    • U B Misguided

      I agree with Colin: I'd much rather "believe" (since there is no offer of proof to this "theory" either) in spontaneous generation (The particles responsible for the big bang spontaneously just "popped" into being) and sheer dumb luck as the source of our Universe being created, rather than admit that there is a very intelligent order to things.

      I'm still perplexed though – why is it we know what makes up a human being and various forms of fauna (plants), and the building blocks thereof, yet we can't throw all those magical ingredients into the mixing bowl and come up with our own person? I guess people don't exist according to science, since we can't do it ourselves yet. I hope to exist one day.

      Colon, since you are a super Genius, please enlighten the rest of us with more of your wisdomic words, like firstly, and secondly – I can't get enough Colon Blow.

      March 19, 2012 at 2:18 pm |
  71. wa

    What's it have to do with Dems and Publicans? Anyway, This scam has been going on for years, Find a few bones, then create a whole body with a face features and call it a evolution link. Also a lot the bones were discovered in 1979. Sounds like they are running low on funding again and needed a missing link find. Yawn. Like cancer. Never a cure but always research. Get it? no money in cure, but plenty for re$earch.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:49 pm |
    • Andrew

      Oh give me a break. Just because you get your science from popular media that likes to contract artists to draw semblences of what look like apelike humans doesn't mean that the researchers on the project did. They had skulls, and researchers tend to like skulls because they tend to carry lots of information about morpohology. Researchers also had mitochondrial and Y-chromosomal DNA to actually check the lineage against modern humans. Now, you're free to go on your merry way denying any and all evidence ever provided to you, arguing "yeah this isn't a transitonal fossil, nor was Lucy, nor was Turkana Boy (found in 84), nor was Taung 1, nor was Selam, no was KNM ER 1470, etc etc" but I could go on for quite a while and all you can do is stand there saying "nope, not a transitional, not a transitional, not a transitional" when I'm pretty damn sure you don't have the faintest clue what a transitional species even is, and would deny ANY fossil ever found as being one, regardless of if it's part of the human evolution chain or not.

      As someone who personally knows some evolutionary biologists, by the way, they don't get a large amount of grant money, evolutionary biologists really don't live luxury lifestyles. The big reason being that no one expects anything different from reasearchers, it's easy to get funding if you promose to overturn paradigms, it's a lot harder to get funding and large research grants when your conclusion will basically be "and yeah... so... we found another slightly interesting feature of the human evolution lineage, as would be expected from continued research into the area".

      Grants favor 'big science', not 'oh look, another fossil'. It's only bone heads like you who believe that evolutionary biologists are all in on some massive conspiricy to fund their lavish lifestyles by faking the rather overwhelming evidence for the theory of evolution.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:06 pm |
      • Rich

        Transitionals? Is thems the kind what fer can turn inta cars? I seen them on tha tee-vee.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:27 pm |
    • youranidiot

      Oh yeah just like the lunar landing was a hoax! You're right it is all an elaborate conspiracy that thousands of people are in on. You're right science is a scam, which is why you don't live in a medieval crap hole and haven't died of Strep throat! I mean just ask yourself "how"? How could a vast ongoing conspiracy about fossils or cancer research go on? How could all the scientists around the world, doing independent research all be in on the same scam? Think about it. I mean really?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:11 pm |
  72. Rocky

    The Devil buried those bones to test your faith.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:45 pm |
    • ballsinyourface

      Heh.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:08 pm |
    • Captain Kirk

      roflmao

      March 15, 2012 at 6:29 pm |
  73. jack

    Show me a dozen of these skulls and I'll believe we've found something new. Otherwise, STFU

    March 15, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
    • Leif

      Show me that your skull isn't empty, otherwise. follow your own advice.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:49 pm |
      • Bob

        I agree

        March 15, 2012 at 5:54 pm |
      • Seth garvin

        @leif ROFL – I needed that.

        March 15, 2012 at 5:56 pm |
    • want2believe

      your ignorance amazes me

      March 15, 2012 at 5:52 pm |
    • Aezel

      Show me your P.h.D. in anthropology otherwise STFU!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:07 pm |
  74. dwt

    Hmmm. Those cheeks. Is that Don Corleone's ancestor?

    March 15, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
  75. teddyT

    Looks like my neighbor

    March 15, 2012 at 5:43 pm |
  76. dwhiteoak

    CNN editors, please do a better job of proofreading before articles are posted! The number of writing errors is embarrassing. I'd like to share this article with my college biology students but I don't want to encourage bad writing habits (they struggle enough as it is). The information is great but the writing is unprofessional. It does make a difference!

    March 15, 2012 at 5:43 pm |
    • Al

      I'd rather show them bad grammar than bad "history of evolution...blah blah blah"

      March 15, 2012 at 5:53 pm |
      • Bob

        You must be a direct descendent. I bet you look like him too.

        March 15, 2012 at 5:56 pm |
  77. adormon

    This is not a new species.These people are no more different than asians and europeans are today. A real slow news day requires desperate measures.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:43 pm |
    • TheTeacher

      yeah, cause CNN decided that this was a new discovery, rather than just reporting dutifully

      March 15, 2012 at 5:46 pm |
    • clearfog

      Your analysis eliminates the necessity for peer review. Thank you for saving everyone this unnecessary expenditure of time and money in completing that part of the scientific method.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:48 pm |
    • Leif

      And we are supposed to value your opinion because...

      March 15, 2012 at 5:50 pm |
    • b

      Oh wow, I didn't realize you were a scientist who has actually studied the bones. I bow to your wisdom adormon.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:51 pm |
    • Al

      To Clearfog - "Scientific?!" HAhahahahahahahhahahhaha... Have some more kool-aid !

      March 15, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
    • McBain05

      There have been many, many human species over the long course of time. These are very different from anatomical modern humans. As different as the Neandthalis species is from modern humans.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:56 pm |
    • clearfog

      Al – Only fools and lunatics say something and then laugh.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:00 pm |
  78. Little Timmy

    Man...that is Lebron James

    March 15, 2012 at 5:42 pm |
    • grakes

      hahahahaha

      March 15, 2012 at 5:49 pm |
    • Den

      No it isn't, it's Linsanity.....they're in Asia

      March 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm |
    • Neeandrathawlsrock!

      Actually, this guy would have left Cleveland too.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:14 pm |
      • clearfog

        If you have a brother in Cleveland and a brother in prison, get the brother out of Cleveland first.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:22 pm |
  79. Darw1n

    Lol, political posts on an anthropological story. You're all neanderthals!

    March 15, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
  80. OldMo

    I was on the fence on this thing but this cartoon is final proof that macroevolution is a fact. Cartoons + theories – legit provable science = fact! Now I can finally call myself a critical thinker.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:39 pm |
    • Mike

      OldMo,

      It's more like ignore any and all science that you find inconvenient, stick your fingers in your ears so that you won't have to deal with facts, and blindly believe a creation myth that says we're all inbred descendants of two people and that snakes can talk.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:46 pm |
      • KumQuat

        And don't forget to listen to Rusj Limbaugh to make your evolutionary leap to greatness complete.

        March 15, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
      • G&S

        Based on who's worldview?

        March 15, 2012 at 6:27 pm |
    • clearfog

      You are partly correct. Not all people evolved from more primitive primates.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:50 pm |
  81. Michael

    I think that it is hilarious that these supposedly distingused and intelligent scientist and archeaologists always jump to a new species to try to prove evolution. First of all, if this person lived hundreds of thousands of years ago as they say, and we all know that unless you are a twin we human beings have differences in our body shapes, sizes, features and so forth. So, just because you find a skull that is shaped a little different doesn't mean this is a whole new creature, it just may mean that person looked a little different.

    Secondly, even if you want to go with the argument that it is defiantely not a current human being, could it possibly be another animal species that was similiar to humans, like apes? That doesn't mean that we, human beings, came from them.

    Next, lets think logically here, if bones have been buried for hundreds of thousands of years, could it be possible that different factors, such as weather, deteriation over time, pressure of the dirt above it could have affected or altered the shape of the bones. Not to mention, since these scientist were not around when this person/creature whatever you want to call it died, they don't know what happened to that persons physical body when they died.

    Quit trying to create a story with fossils when you weren't around to know the story. You can't recreate a person's life and what happened to them from just a skull you find. Seriously people?

    March 15, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
    • purnellmeagrejr

      Michael: I find your idle pseudo-scientific hypothesizing hilarious.But that's the grea0t thing about the internet – anthropologists, nuclear scientists, metereologists, philosophers everywhere. Why don't we just pose the great scientific question of the era on the net and have posters vote?
      Yours truly,
      Al Einstein

      March 15, 2012 at 5:43 pm |
    • Eisenhorn

      Actually, you half-educated nit wit....you can. From the teeth we can identify the nature of ones diet. Of course we can also clearly see what other fossils were found with them and deduce certain things from that.

      Learn to spell and think critically and for gods sake turn off Fox news....

      March 15, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
      • Stork

        I Second that!! Turn off Fox News!!!! My god those fools on that channel are complete imbeciles.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:24 pm |
    • clearfog

      It is not uncommon for stupid people to think that what smart people say is hilarious.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
      • Bob

        Nice one!

        March 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm |
    • Colin

      "Quit trying to create a story with fossils when you weren't around to know the story. You can't recreate a person's life and what happened to them from just a skull you find. Seriously people?"

      YEs, but doing so based on some late Iron Age mythology about a guy rising from the dead makes much more sense.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:47 pm |
      • U B Misguided

        I know right!?! Some people's kids. hahaha... Much better that we theorize matter just coming into being all the sudden out of nowhere – Good thing we got the smart spontaneously generating big bang matter huh Colin, because it knew not to spontaneously generate again the whole time the universe has been in existence. WHEW! How Scientific are WE!?!

        March 19, 2012 at 3:17 pm |
    • Anthropologist

      Michael, you have thoroughly detailed your lack of knowledge about scientific processes. How entertaining of you.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:48 pm |
    • GB

      Those are all interesting question.

      Here's the thing though: You throw out the questions, but don't provide any answers. This is because you are, presumably, not a scientist trained in anthropology. The people who did this study are trained in that field, and very likely have answers to those questions. Do you think that you have someone thought of these issues, and they haven't?

      There is one thing that rubs me the wrong way: it's people who have not relevant education in a particular scientic field thinking they can quickly, and easily poke holes in a scientific theory on some website comment board, after a few seconds of thought.

      Don't you think that the generations of people that have decades of study and education in the field haven't already thought of those questions, and actual applied science to answering them to their satisfaction?

      March 15, 2012 at 5:52 pm |
    • Leif

      I think it is hilarious that every armchair ignoramus on the internet thinks they know more than those pesky scientists.
      Damn them for doing their job after spending all that time learning things. Who do they think they are?

      March 15, 2012 at 5:53 pm |
      • Republican

        That's quite the auto biography, buddy.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:54 pm |
    • Frank

      haha are you serious? they just "looked different"? god you're an idiot

      March 15, 2012 at 5:56 pm |
    • Aezel

      Dear Michael,

      Just because you are too dumb to understand how anthropology works, doesn't mean everyone is.

      Sincerely,
      Everyone Else.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:56 pm |
    • newbie

      You are totally clueless. What are you, a 5th grader?

      March 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm |
    • Chris R

      I'm thinking you didn't read the article. First off, the bones are from around 12,000 years ago. Not hundreds of thousands. The question they are *trying* to resolve is if it is a new species or if this is a very early modern human type. Second, bones do not deform under pressure like plastic. They may break but it's easy to put them back together in a way that is true to the original shape. Lastly, we aren't looking at minor variation that falls within the norms of species. These are substantial differences seen consistently on multiple specimens.

      Look, I understand that you don't believe in evolution. That's fine. The thing is that you the best science we have backs up the theory of evolution to the point where it is, for all intents and purposes, an accepted scientific truth. There may be disagreement about the details but that's it. The framework is solid. So if you are going to use a scientific argument to try and knock down evolution you'll need to provide compelling proof instead of just saying "These people who have dedicated decades of their life to this field have no idea what they are talking about. People like me, with no real training or education in the field, obviously know better than them." You are much better just using religious grounds to reject evolution and it would be a lot more honest for you if you did.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm |
    • verify

      Michael,

      Wow! You "defiantely" know so much more than highly skilled and careful, meticulous scientists. I'm sure that they NEVER even thought of any of your ideas. You ought to write a paper for peer review.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm |
    • Please get real, and get off the religious band wagen....

      My God! Reliogion justs gets so less believable and interesting as scientists and real thinkers figure out what really is happening....or is the world flat? Does the sun go around the earth? Why think, the good book will tell me how to think right Micheal.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:03 pm |
      • Republican

        Hush it, noob, and learn to spell.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:30 pm |
      • ilikecheese

        I don't agree with either Michael OR you. In my opinion, religion gets MORE believable as scientists find out more.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:15 pm |
    • Supra

      Remember that in evolutionary theory fossils are pretty much useless. Their only real benefit is a visual indication. The basis of the theory is genetics, so even if we never found fossils it wouldn't really make much difference.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:06 pm |
    • SARAH

      Actually you can find out how a person died from their remains. You can see how old they were, gender, if they ever gave birth, etc. I'm not sure I believe this is a whole new species at all. I do however believe that with techonology today and advanced science we can learn more about this creature.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:13 pm |
    • JohnK

      Spoken like a true pseudo-scientist. You read a short article on the 'Net and now you have all the answers.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:17 pm |
      • Republican

        You just described about 99.9% of all the pro-evolutionists.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:32 pm |
    • G&S

      @Michael, I am a Christ follower that enjoys science. I know of a number of scientist that don't share the same worldview as the author of this post. To say that the best science backs up the theory of evolution is false. It only backs the beliefs of a person with a skeptical worldview.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:39 pm |
      • brobin

        And I know a scientist who is a creationist too. He makes similar claims as you. He thinks there is zero evidence. for example, he asks "why don't we see Monkeys turn into humans all the time"...

        Sounds stupid right.. its because he is a COMPUTER SCIENTIST and knows zero about evolution, genetics, etc. He is born again. Great java programmer though. :)

        By the way, many scientists don't believe in climate change either. You hear that all the time. Of course, 99.9 percent of Climate scientists do. You know, the ones that study climate, as opposed to mechanical engineers, chemists, etc.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:48 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      """lets think logically here"""

      You go first. We'll wait.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:47 pm |
  82. kkk

    looks like ur mom

    March 15, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
  83. wow

    now this is a very funny picture looks like a caveman

    March 15, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
    • Dave

      Uncle Bob!! Where have you been!!

      March 15, 2012 at 5:42 pm |
  84. Colin

    There are two theories that are totally accepted by people that really irk me. The first is the theory of evolution and the second is the va.ginal birth of human beings. They are both against the word of GOD.

    It is OBVOIUS to me that storks bring babies! I have never seen a woman giving birth, but I have seen a lot of storks, especially on margarine containers. If you ever go to the beach, you will lots of storks carrying babies. They look just like pelicans because they carry the babies in their mouths. If women gave birth to babies, there would be no need for a navel, but that is how the stork picks the babies up from HEAVEN.

    There is no REAL evidence that women give birth to babies. It is just a THEORY. If they did, why is it that men never give birth to babies? Why just women? Where do boys come from? It makes no sense. There is also the problem of the missing link, because there are only ever midwives and never “mid-husbands”?

    If women gave birth to babies, why are there still women and babies? And why is it you never see a half-woman, half-baby!! Explain that evolutionists and va.ginal birth believers! Bet you CAN’T.

    If you look at a stork, it is INTELLIGENTLY designed to carry babies. Why would that be if it didn’t deliver babies? And what about twins and triplets? What, do some women have 2, or even 3 uteruses? That is stupid. A stork can EASILLY carry two or three babies, but a woman couldn’t.

    Why is it that for every 50 boys born, there are 50 girls. What, can a va.gina count? Ha, how stupid. But a stork could. And, what about all the GAPS in the birth record. One time I took a peek at my mother’s va.gina, and it was so small and babies are SO BIG.

    You evolutionists are so dumb. Your think babies JUST HAPPENED in their mother’s womb. What, do you think they just appeared out of yucky, slimy blood and stuff ? Fred Hoyle once calculated that the chance of a baby spontaneously appearing in a woman’s uterus was the same as a storm blowing through a junkyard and creating a Boing-747. That’s harder to believe than that the stork brought them!

    You might like to think you came from a mere zygote, but I KNOW I came from a glorious stork.

    My father insists that I was born because he slept with my mother. I derisively call this the Big Bang theory, because he cannot tell me what happened BEFORE the Big bang. And what caused the Big Bang? It must have been a stork.

    You might ask, ok “what caused the stork?” Well the stork was always there.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
    • Aezel

      Genius.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
    • grakes

      Very good pair-o-dee

      March 15, 2012 at 5:47 pm |
    • johndanger

      By Jove, I think you've got it!!!

      March 15, 2012 at 5:50 pm |
    • TheTeacher

      Consider starting your own religion. You've got as good a theological foundation as any other religion, and ahe're all kinds of tax benefits

      March 15, 2012 at 5:51 pm |
    • Stork

      I am with the Stork Union and I emphatically deny we carry human babies! Human babies are born to men and women who nature has designed to procreate... That was not our Fault Colin!

      March 15, 2012 at 6:20 pm |
    • Religion is so myth....Not, yes, not

      I was born of the seed of David, which if you know anything at all about the bible makes me a part of the Adam and Eve story. That whole things was un real man. they had a lot of off spring........its so true. People are so dumb they beleive a book a written who knows when and by whom for the most part that is centered on farce. Love it.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:39 pm |
    • Palin 2112

      FAIL!

      March 15, 2012 at 11:16 pm |
    • U B Misguided

      "Fred Hoyle once calculated that the chance of a baby spontaneously appearing in a woman’s uterus was the same as a storm blowing through a junkyard and creating a Boing-747."

      Yet you follow the thought that what created the universe was spontaneous generation of matter... so you are debunking what exactly? one spontaneity over another?

      Your *cough* wisdom dumbfounds me – no literally, I have found dumbness in your words. Please continue to spew quotes and figures from other people, rather than present your OWN thoughts. How typical..

      March 19, 2012 at 3:00 pm |
  85. Sifleut

    Judging by most of these comments, there are still some Neanderthals living out there.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
    • Anthropologist

      That's an insult to Neanderthals.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:50 pm |
    • Neanderthal

      If you're not Black, you have 1-4% of Neanderthal genome.

      March 16, 2012 at 12:11 am |
  86. Foram Mehta

    CNN won't give me an interview, and yet this reporter is writing stories. Even Word could've caught most of the multiple grammar and spelling errors in this. Bravo.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
    • Dave

      FYI two spelling errors : "moden" -> "modern" and "palaeoanthropologist" -> "palaeoanthropologist" Word also highlighted only two other sentences for grammatical errors.

      Yeah, at least spell check the thing before posting it.

      March 15, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
  87. dmadam

    And people still want to believe in the creation and ID myth.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
    • Aezel

      Throwing your hands up in the air and going "I'm too dumb to understand this so God musta dunnit!" is a lot easier than actually educating yourself. That is why creationism and intelligent design still exist.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
  88. Josh

    It does look like Bush... especially around the eyes, doesn't it?

    March 15, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
    • Ha!

      II think it looks like Obama cuz it's black and lacks intelligence.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:41 pm |
      • wow. americans

        you are an idiot

        March 15, 2012 at 5:49 pm |
      • Republican

        I'd argue to say it's a muslim, but it's older than 1200 years old, guess it can't be Obama.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:33 pm |
  89. Josh

    "tested using a technique called radio-active carbon dating"

    Is this one of those new fangled scientific things?

    March 15, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
    • TheTeacher

      Yup. Can't trust 'em carbons dating

      March 15, 2012 at 5:53 pm |
      • Republican

        Can't trust science, at all, look at how many people it's killed.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        """Can't trust 'em carbons dating"""

        Yeah, that C-C bond sure looks single gender to me. It just ain't natural!

        Right, Republican?

        March 15, 2012 at 6:52 pm |
      • Republican

        Jeff, quit trying to troll me, you suck at it. Get a life.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:43 pm |
  90. Davidsa

    There are people alive today with those same features.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
  91. rec

    THIS IS SO REDICULOUS! ........PLEASE.......ARE YOU GUYS SEREOUS?

    March 15, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
    • blah9999

      Yes. Science is very "sereous"

      March 15, 2012 at 5:32 pm |
      • Toni

        Don't be "rediculous"

        March 15, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
    • george

      No they aren't serious but the Geocentric Flat Earth Society is still up in arms about it.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
    • Leif

      If you are going to insult a group of professional scientists,who have spent their lives learning more than you ever will, at least learn how to spell "ridiculous".

      March 15, 2012 at 6:00 pm |
      • Republican

        Yeah, you have to earn the right to insult people around here, because Leif here, an obvious epitome if a want to be dictator, says so! Did you just learn how to spell, buddy? Usually people who have just learned to spell are the ones making fun of others for the lack thereof. What a tool.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
  92. blah9999

    If Presidents Obama and Lincoln had a baby, this is what it would look like.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:28 pm |
    • Josh

      I don't understand. Are you for or against gay marriage?

      March 15, 2012 at 5:33 pm |
    • manny

      HA HA HA! THAT is funny!

      March 15, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
    • Geezer

      This is what George H. W. Bush's and Barbara Bush's children actually look like.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:42 pm |
  93. Sanchez

    Isn't that Grady from Sanford & Son?

    March 15, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
    • XDJX

      yes...lol

      March 15, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
    • chaz

      ahahahaaa...I was thinking "he looks familiar..."

      ROFL

      March 15, 2012 at 5:32 pm |
    • DB

      hah!!! he looks like the father from Good Times!

      March 15, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
    • TheTeacher

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHahahahaha ahaha haha ha ha....

      Best laugh in while...XD

      March 15, 2012 at 5:54 pm |
      • Kid Dynomite

        Looks more like Florida than James.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:29 pm |
  94. sao

    FROM YES WE CAN TO IT'S NOT MY FAULT!

    March 15, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  95. marc

    This is not a new human species. I see a lot of this kind here in the U.S.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
    • Leif

      How many relatives do you have, exactly?

      March 15, 2012 at 6:02 pm |
  96. Padraig

    @Point – I don't think he was a liberal. His only quote found so far "hey, I can see Russia from here!"

    March 15, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
    • CT

      Plus no remains have been found in any of our 57 states.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
      • TheTeacher

        Anyhow our children is learning about this on the internets.

        March 15, 2012 at 5:58 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        """Plus no remains have been found in any of our 57 states."""

        Your remark isn't as witty as you would like it to be, considering you obviously have no idea how that 57 states quote came about.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:28 pm |
  97. Tony

    Do you spell check?

    March 15, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
    • Mike

      The grammar in this story is not very good. Can't seem to get their verbs and subjects to agree. As for evolution? There is no other way to explain this find. Eventually religion will go away and science will prevail. It is already happening.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:53 pm |
  98. Padraig

    Obviously these "fossils" were placed by the devil to lead people astray from the only true story of creation found in Genesis. Furthermore, Genesis 8:22 disproves the global warming scam. Oh. Wait. This is CNN, not Faux Noise. My bad. As you were.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
    • Harvey Wallbanger

      And isn't it amazing how God made all of those rocks look like they are millions of years old ... I believe you are being facetious; nobody could be that blinded by the Book.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
      • chaz

        you have to remember, time is not literal in the bible... if the creation of man was however many years ago...and the bible says 6k years ago...maybe its the same.

        the dinos were before that, say on day 2 of creation....fast forward 4 days of creation or 20 billion years or whatever and you get man...

        its all relative...

        March 15, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        """the dinos were before that, say on day 2 of creation....fast forward 4 days of creation or 20 billion years or whatever and you get man... its all relative..."""

        And inbreeding relatives at that, if we use the bible as our source of genealogy. Whole lot of begattin' goin' on.

        March 15, 2012 at 6:26 pm |
      • ilikecheese

        I strongly agree with chaz's first statement

        March 15, 2012 at 7:02 pm |
      • Yakobi

        chaz, if the babble, er, I mean bible lied about a "day", then it lied about everything.

        BTW, there are no gods or goddesses, demons or devils, ghosts or goblins. Religion was invented by man to control the masses.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:18 pm |
  99. Brandon

    There is nothing new about that. I see that guy at least once a week.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:18 pm |
  100. Point

    Look at that, they found the original Liberal.

    March 15, 2012 at 5:16 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      """Look at that, they found the original Liberal."""

      Yeah, how about that? Good thing THEY evolved, eh?

      March 15, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
      • Michael

        hahahahahaha! and to anyone (repigs) that say ohhh that looks like black people, well duh!! thats what common ancestry (to ALL of us black/white/whatever) means: "LIKENESS." You morons!! maybe if you pulled your heads out of your a&$ you would understand some basic biology sh%* that kids have already learned in elementary school

        March 15, 2012 at 5:42 pm |
    • Austin

      Why are Republicans so bad at being funny?

      March 15, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
      • Boohincus

        It's the inherent limitations of their oh so literal minds.

        March 15, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
      • Republican

        Why are liberals bad at everything?

        March 15, 2012 at 6:37 pm |
      • Jeff Williams

        """Why are liberals bad at everything?"""

        Speaking of a lack of humor: the body of evidence builds.........

        March 15, 2012 at 6:55 pm |
      • jms58

        Beause that would be too many things to do at one time. Their one and only objective is to constantly blame someone else for the problems that they create.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:32 pm |
      • Republican

        Poor Jeff, he's a rager.

        March 15, 2012 at 7:36 pm |
    • CT

      Actually this species prolly had to provide it's own food, clothing and housing.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:26 pm |
    • lolokay

      Yea but I'd imagine they weren't literate. So they'd be a lot more comparable to Republicans.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:28 pm |
      • Republican

        I resemble that remark!

        March 15, 2012 at 6:27 pm |
    • CT

      shave the beard and give it a dress..... Ms. barry O

      March 15, 2012 at 5:28 pm |
      • KK Denver

        better than the cousin you married

        March 15, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
    • alfredo

      True, the first conservative was still walking on all fours and living in trees. Lucky for them there were some of those Liberal teachers around to show them how to walk upright.

      March 15, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
    • Bible Clown©

      Nope, it's not highly evolved enough. Still had primitive features.

      March 16, 2012 at 8:40 am |
1 2 3

Contributors

  • Elizabeth LandauElizabeth Landau
    Writer/Producer
  • Sophia DengoSophia Dengo
    Senior Designer