All: Questioning has again broken out about the 7 myr old Toumai fossil. It's not wuat it's "supposed" to be. You can read about it here, though there isn't a...
TO ALL WHO KNOW ME: Due to a massive spam attack which started today, I could technically receive your e-mails for the next while, but to find your messages, I...
Sahelanthropus was clearly a hominin. It shares 14 cranio-dental similarities with Australopithecus and 10 with humans while only sharing 5 cranio-dental...
Could I request that when statements like this are made, the data be referenced to the original literature? Otherwise it is difficult for others on this list...
Marcel: FWIW, I'm in agreement with you that Sahelanthropus was a hominin. But remember, we are looking at Paleoanthropologyland, where the inhabitants tend...
Hominin it may be, but the questions about dating seem valid to me. A lot of desert finds are on the surface. Now somebody who was there says this one was,...
I wonder if you're referring to the Russian 'Returned Mail' attacks which periodically flood my inbox, even tho my server provides a virus/spam filter.. Even...
That's the nature of science. But the hard evidence eventually decides which of the proposed models are correct. So those who have criticized the proposed...
The cranio-dental evidence for the hominin status for Sahelanthropus can be found in my most recent paper on Oreopithecus which can be found in the files...
... Fine. However, a serious cloud is placed over the provenance and reliability of the fossil should the objections to its published dates prove to be...
The Brunet paper (Cosmogenic nuclide dating of Sahelanthropus tchadensis and Australopithecus bahrelghazali: Mio-Pliocene hominids from Chad/Proc Natl Acad Sci...
... question. ... That is correct. The provenance of surface finds is not reliably established by dating of surrounding surface, by other nearby surface ...
So your argument is that the primitive fauna that Sahelanthropus was associated with may somehow not be associated with Sahelanthropus and that they were...
So your argument too is that the primitive fauna that Sahelanthropus was associated with may somehow not be associated with Sahelanthropus and that they were...
Don't play with words, Marcel. You know what I wrote and you know the objections raised by one of the prominent scientists of the original expedition....
Bloglines user AnneGilbert (avgilbert@...) has sent this item to you, with the following personal message: All: This is a short piece from Dieneke's...
Would you please tell us what you argument is. The primitive fauna associated with the sahelanthropine remains suggest that it was older than less primitive...
... The association has been called into question by one of the leading scientists on the original expedition. It is really easy to understand, therefore, that...
... Sahelanthropus was ... Sahelanthropus and ... There was an incredible context of skepticism in France, from the start, about sahelanthropus, Brunet told...
Calling the 2002 TM-266 (Sahelanthropus skull) into question is one thing. But I read nothing in the article that questioned the fossil remains from the two...
... The latter fossils were given the same genus and species designation as the former. Call the former's dating into question and you call the latter's...
All: Julien Riel-Salvatore's "A Very Remote Period Indeed" blog has a nice roundup of some surveys of Paleolithic sites in Greece, India, and Iran. Lots of...
Bloglines user AnneGilbert (avgilbert@...) has sent this item to you, with the following personal message: All: More on that "woolly mammoth" story. ...
The Anthracotheriid Unit simply reveals what animals were there despite any dating technique. And some of the animals that were there, a primitive suid and a...
Anne, It also looks like there were probably several species of woolly mammoth, too, and probably also a pretty good time interval between when they were...