Post reply

Reply to the message by David Turell

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> From ~28,000 ago:
> 
> https://phys.org/news/2025-03-scientists-date-ancient-child-resembles.html
> 
> "Scientists have dated the skeleton of an ancient child that caused a stir when it was first discovered because it carries features from both humans and Neanderthals.
> 
> "The child's remains were discovered 27 years ago in a rock shelter called Lagar Velho in central Portugal. The nearly complete skeleton was stained red, and scientists think it may have been wrapped in a painted animal skin before burial.
> 
> "When the humanlike child was discovered, scientists noted that some of their attributes—including body proportions and jawbone—looked Neanderthal. The researchers suggested that the child was descended from populations in which humans and Neanderthals mated and mixed. That was a radical notion at the time, but advances in genetics have since proven those populations existed—and people today still carry Neanderthal DNA.
> 
> "But trying to figure out when exactly the child lived has been difficult. Small roots had grown through the bones and contamination—from plants or other sources—made it impossible for scientists to use traditional carbon dating to measure the child's age. They instead dated the charcoal and animal bones around the skeleton to between 27,700 and 29,700 years ago.
> 
> "Techniques have improved, and researchers reported Friday in the journal Science Advances that they were able to date the skeleton by measuring part of a protein that's found primarily in human bones.
> 
> "Examining part of a crushed arm, they revealed that the earlier estimate was in the ballpark: the skeleton was from between 27,780 and 28,550 years ago.
> 
> ***
> 
> "She noted the initial discovery was more than a skeleton—it was also the grave of a young child. When dating the bones, she couldn't help but wonder who loved the child, what made them laugh and what their world looked like in the short four years they walked the planet."
> 
> Comment: this comes from an age when Neanderthals were disappearing. Both humans and Neanderthal buried their dead, but I would guess the dominant parent was human.