Tag: Skull (page 1 of 2)

ARCHANGEL MICHAEL ~ Dancing with Diamond Star Fire: 10:10 & 11:11 Gateways New Beginning

View Article Here   Read More

Why the Government Refuses to Turn Against Monsanto

Ready Or Not ... Here We Come! A Message From Archangel Michael/Ashtar Sheran

Dr. Mercola, GuestIn the video below, Funny or Die pokes fun at Monsanto’s “feeding the world” message by highlighting some of the most obvious features of genetically engineered (GE) foods, such as the unnatural crossing of genetic material between plant and animal kingdoms, the use of toxic chemicals and Monsanto’s ever-expanding monopoly.​“I own everything!” Mama Monsanto exclaims, and that’s pretty close to the truth. Monsanto [...]

View Article Here   Read More

Why the Government Refuses to Turn Against Monsanto

Dr. Mercola, GuestIn the video below, Funny or Die pokes fun at Monsanto’s “feeding the world” message by highlighting some of the most obvious features of genetically engineered (GE) foods, such as the unnatural crossing of genetic material between plant and animal kingdoms, the use of toxic chemicals and Monsanto’s ever-expanding monopoly.​“I own everything!” Mama Monsanto exclaims, and that’s pretty close to the truth. Monsanto [...]

View Article Here   Read More

Greg Giles ~ Who are the Authentic Channels? ~ Part 2

I wish to make it clear that the complicity of Freemasons in this mind control program which uses synthetic telepathy, or voice to skull (V2K) technology, is not a wild theory I am proposing but a conclusion I have reached through careful analysis o...

View Article Here   Read More

Greg Giles ~ Beyond Discernment ~ Who are the Authentic Channels? Part 1

I wish to make it clear that the complicity of Freemasons in this mind control program which uses synthetic telepathy, or voice to skull (V2K) technology, is not a theory I am proposing but point of fact, as the group that had been sending me the '...

View Article Here   Read More

Mind Control Programs Exposed – Your Thoughts Are Not Your Own

Vic Bishop, Staff WriterResearch into the structure and function of the human brain continues to accelerate. Collaborations, such as the Human Brain Project in Europe and the BRAIN initiative in the United States, are exploring making great advances in understanding the brain’s circuitry and computing principles.The supposed goals of these research initiatives are to understand the cause of and to improve treatment of brain disorders, to create neu [...]

View Article Here   Read More

Researchers discover fossils of tiny mammals that frolicked among dinosaurs

The little tree-climber, Agilodocodon scansorius


Excerpt from 
sciencerecorder.com



Two new fossil discoveries push the timeline back on the appearance of burrowing and tree-climbing mammals. Fossils of the shrew-sized creatures found in China date to the age of the dinosaurs and show that mammals of that period were already highly specialized, well-performing animals. One of the rodent-like animals was likely a long-clawed tree-dweller, while the other was shovel-pawed tunnel-digger.

 
The little tree-climber, Agilodocodon scansorius, is the earliest arboreal mammal ever discovered. A report published this week in Science Magazine highlights its traits suited for its habitat, including long claws, spade-like front teeth for gnawing into bark, and flexible elbows and ankles. It is believed to have weighed up to 40 grams, a bit less than a typical hotdog without condiments, and lived about 165 million years ago in what is Mongolia today.

“When we got into the study of Agilodocodon, we realized that the outline for the horny sheath of the claws is preserved,” Zhe-Xi Luo, professor of organismal biology and anatomy at the University of Chicago, said in an interview. “Those soft tissues are not preserved in the vast majority of mammals. It has a very long, curved narrow claw — one feature to show that it is a good climber.” 


Image: Artist's rendition Docofossor brachydactylus
Docofossor brachydactylus


In a report published in the same issue of Science, the other mammal, called Docofossor brachydactylus, is described to have stood no more than 9 centimeters tall and weighed only 17 grams, about the size of a juvenile mouse. Docfossor is the earliest underground-dwelling mammal ever found and shares similarities with the African golden mole, having short, wide digits suitable for digging. The little digger is estimated to have lived some 160 million years ago in what is today Ganggou Fossil Site in China’s Hebei province.

Both fossils are of creatures that belong to the order Docodonta. The discoveries are the first to provide full skeletons of this order, which had previously been characterized by evidence from fossils of teeth, jaws, and bits of skull.

View Article Here   Read More

Incredible 50-ft dinosaur unearthed by Chinese farmers

This illustration shows what the newly discovered long-necked dinosaur may have looked like.Excerpt from cnn.com Paleontologists have discovered a 50-ft "dragon" dinosaur species in China that may have roamed the earth 160 million years ago in t...

View Article Here   Read More

Is this the Skull of a Bigfoot Discovered in Nevada? ~ M.K.Davis Discusses the Sensational Find

Nevada's Lovelock Cave

View Article Here   Read More

Study: Neanderthals were not human after all, but separate species

  Excerpt from  dailydigestnews.comThe nose knows whether or not Neanderthals are members of our own species. Turns out the differences in the Neanderthal nose compared to that of modern day humans could be substantial enough to consider N...

View Article Here   Read More

Mysteries of the Early Human Ancestors #1 ~ Why did we grow large brains?

Human brains are about three times as large as those of our early australopithecines ancestors that lived 4 million to 2 million years ago, and for years, scientists have wondered how our brains got so big. A new study suggests social competition could be behind the increase in brain size. Credit NIH, NADA

livescience.com

There are many ways to try to explain why human brains today are so big compared to those of early humans, but the major cause may be social competition, new research suggests. 

But with several competing ideas, the issue remains a matter of debate. 

Compared to almost all other animals, human brains are larger as a percentage of body weight. And since the emergence of the first species in our Homo genus (Homo habilis) about 2 million years ago, the human brain has doubled in size. And when compared to earlier ancestors, such as australopithecines that lived 4 million to 2 million years ago, our brains are three times as large. For years, scientists have wondered what could account for this increase.

The three major hypotheses have focused on climate change, the demands of ecology, and social competition. A new statistical analysis of data on 175 fossil skulls supports the latter hypothesis. 

Behind the hypotheses

The climate idea proposes that dealing with unpredictable weather and major climate shifts may have increased the ability of our ancestors to think ahead and prepare for these environmental changes, which in turn led to a larger, more cognitively adept brain.
The ecology hypothesis states that, as our ancestors migrated away from the equator, they encountered environmental changes, such as less food and other resources. "So you have to be a little bit more clever to figure it out," said David Geary, a professor from the University of Missouri. Also, less parasite exposure could have played a role in the makings of a bigger brain. When your body combats parasites, it cranks up its immune system, which uses up calories that could have gone to boost brain development. Since there are fewer parasites farther away from the equator, migrating north or south could have meant that our predecessors had more opportunity to grow a larger brain because their bodies were not fighting off as many pathogens.


Finally, other researchers think that social competition for scarce resources influenced brain size. As populations grow, more people are contesting for the same number of resources, the thinking goes. Those with a higher social status, who are "a little bit smarter than other folks" will have more access to food and other goods, and their offspring will have a higher chance of survival, Geary said.


Those who are not as socially adept will die off, pushing up the average social "fitness" of the group. "It's that type of process, that competition within a species, for status, for control of resources, that cycles over and over again through multiple generations, that is a process that could easily explain a very, very rapid increase in brain size," Geary said.

Weighing the options

To examine which hypothesis is more likely, Geary and graduate student Drew Bailey analyzed data from 175 skull fossils — from humans and our ancestors — that date back to sometime between 10,000 ago and 2 million years ago.


The team looked at multiple factors, including how old the fossils were, where they were found, what the temperature was and how much the temperature varied at the time the Homo species lived, and the level of parasites in the area. They also looked at the population density of the region in order to measure social competition, "assuming that the more fossils you find in a particular area at a particular time, the more likely the population was larger," Geary said.


They then used a statistical analysis to test all of the variables at once to see how well they predicted brain size. "By far the best predictor was population density," Geary said. "And in fact, it seemed that there was very little change in brain size across our sample of fossil skulls until we hit a certain population size. Once that population density was hit, there was a very quick increase in brain size," he said.


Looking at all the variables together allowed the researchers to "separate out which variables are really important and which variables may be correlated for other reasons," added Geary. While the climate variables were still significant, their importance was much lower than that of population density, he said. The results were published in the March 2009 issue of the journal Human Nature.


Questions linger

The social competition hypothesis "sounds good," said Ralph Holloway, an anthropologist at Columbia University, who studies human brain evolution. But, he adds: "How would you ever go about really testing that with hard data?" 

He points out that the sparse cranium data "doesn’t tell you anything about the differences in populations for Homo erectus, or the differences in populations of Neanderthals." For example, the number of Homo erectus crania that have been found in Africa, Asia, Indonesia and parts of Europe is fewer than 25, and represent the population over hundreds of thousands of years, he said. 

"You can't even know the variation within a group let alone be certain of differences between groups," Holloway said. Larger skulls would be considered successful, but "how would you be able to show that these were in competition?" 

However, Holloway is supportive of the research. "I think these are great ideas that really should be pursued a little bit more," he said. 

Alternative hypotheses

Holloway has another hypothesis for how our brains got so big. He thinks that perhaps increased gestation time in the womb or increased dependency time of children on adults could have a played role. The longer gestation or dependency time "would have required more social cooperation and cognitive sophistication on the part of the parents," he said. Males and females would have needed to differentiate their social roles in a complementary way to help nurture the child. The higher level of cognition needed to perform these tasks could have led to an increase in brain size.


Still other hypotheses look at diet as a factor. Some researchers think that diets high in fish and shellfish could have provided our ancestors with the proper nutrients they needed to grow a big brain.
And another idea is that a decreased rate of cell death may have allowed more brain neurons to be synthesized, leading to bigger noggins. 

Ultimately, no theory can be absolutely proven, and the scant fossil record makes it hard to test hypotheses. "If you calculate a generation as, let's say, 20 years, and you know that any group has to have a minimal breeding size, then the number of fossils that we have that demonstrates hominid evolution is something like 0.000001 percent," Holloway said. "So frankly, I mean, all hypotheses look good."

View Article Here   Read More

MAX The 13th Crystal Skull- The Complete Paradigm

{mainvote}

Archangel Metatron via James Tyberonn

Greetings Dear Beloved ! I am Metatron, Lord of Light. I greet you in Unconditional Love !

And so we speak this moment on the 13th Paradigm, the living crystalline li...

View Article Here   Read More

Denise Le Fay: One Month Into 2012 & We’ve Been Solar Fried!

{mainvote}

by Denise

Did your DNA get sunburned during January 2012? Does your head feel like it's three times larger than normal...whatever "normal" is at this point? How's your digestive tract been working, or rather, no...

View Article Here   Read More

Older posts

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
.
unless otherwise marked.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy



Up ↑