Last Few Early Humans Survived in 'Eden,' 195,000 years ago, Scientists Say

[웃 910]

A strip of land on Africa's southern coast became a last refuge for the band of early humans who survived an ice age that wiped out the species elsewhere, scientists maintained Sunday. The land, referred to by researchers as "the garden of Eden," may have been the only part of Africa to remain continuously habitable during the ice age that began about 195,000 years ago.

Scientists' excavations showed how a combination of rich vegetation on land and nutrient-laden currents in the sea created a source of food that could sustain early humans through devastating climate changes.

"Shortly after ** sapiens first evolved, the harsh climate conditions nearly extinguished our species," said Professor Curtis Marean, of the Institute of Human Origins at Arizona State University. "Recent finds suggest the small population that gave rise to all humans alive today survived by exploiting a unique combination of resources along the southern coast of Africa."

The idea that early humans were once reduced to a tiny remnant population arose from research showing that modern humans have far less genetic diversity than most other species. Some scientists suggested the human population could have fallen to as low as a few hundred individuals during this period, while others insisted the evidence to support this theory remains weak.

During his study, Marean discovered that the isolated caves around an area known as Pinnacle Point, South Africa, 240 miles (386 kilometers) east of Cape Town, were rich in ancient human artifacts.

In a paper due to be published soon, Marean and his colleagues argued the caves contain archaeological remains going back at least 164,000 years -- and possibly beyond.

The remains also showed that, despite the hardships suffered by early humans in other places, the inhabitants of Pinnacle Point were living in a land of plenty.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/26/early-humans-survived-eden-scientists-say/?test=latestnews

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

So, the Bible was right after all. Amazing.

[Bugs 455]

So, the Bible was right after all. Amazing.

The literalists would have many problems with the above story though, of course. Namely, the age of these findings, the fact they were the remnants of a pre-existing human race, etc.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The literalists would have many problems with the above story though, of course. Namely, the age of these findings, the fact they were the remnants of a pre-existing human race, etc.

Yes. The Bible is best studied in context. Taken literally, it would be difficult to reconcile the at least three different versions of creation contained within the book of Genesis, most of which was compiled during the Babylonian captivity, and borrowed heavily from the mythology of their captors, be they Babylonian, or Persian. It also puts much of the admonishments to others in context.

[Pooky 3,804]

So, the Bible was right after all. Amazing.

So, was it Adam and Eve?

Or was it Ug and Uga?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So, was it Adam and Eve?

Or was it Ug and Uga?

[Pooky 3,804]

Did they have Geico, even way back when?