A) ~195,000 years
Article McDougall I, Brown FH, Fleagle JG. Stratigraphic placement a...
B) ~233,000 years
Article Age of the oldest known Homo sapiens from eastern Africa
C) ~125,000 years, if the two correlations below are valid:
1) https://twitter.com/SahinCAKIR70414/status/1786143316242837718
2) https://twitter.com/SahinCAKIR70414/status/1816969646140182938
In New Paradigm,
https://twitter.com/SahinCAKIR70414/status/1814412126162739339,
Omo 1 is most probably younger than 140 ka despite the redating to ~195 ka [51] and also despite the ~233 ka based on the correlation of the KHS tuff with the eruption of the Shala volcano ~350 km away [143]. The ~195 ka is based on the Nakaa'kire tuff that is older than Omo 1 whereas KHS tuff is stratigraphically younger than Omo 1. If the ~233 ka is correct, KHS tuff (and thus Omo 1) impossibly appears to be older than Nakaa'kire tuff,~195 ka. Until now, "Vidal et al. (2022) made no attempt to address this discrepancy" [17].
On the other hand, McDougall et al. [51] pointed outthe other possibility that “The two parts of Member II (...) may correspond to the two phases identified in sapropel S5 (119–124 kyr)”. It means significantly increased precipitation and so very rapidly deposition of Member II in MIS 5e. In this case, the top of Member I (and Omo 1) maybe ~125 ka old.
In anatomy, some unusual features of Omo 1’s postcranial skeleton are shared with some Levantine early moderns (Qafzeh 8, Qafzeh 9, and Skhul 5), and with Neanderthals, and also with some specimens from the European Gravettian, especially Grotte des Enfants 4 [144]. These affinities, of course, support a post-140 ka age for Omo 1.
Omo 2 corresponds to the same stratigraphic level with Omo 1 but 2.6 km away and also relatively (~60 cm) deeper compared to the base of Member II [51]. In New Paradigm, Omo 2 most probably is coeval with the Ngaloba (Laetoli H.18) cranium, 129 ka old [20]. If so, both are retrogressive forms of Sapiens due to the sudden cooling 129 ka ago
( https://twitter.com/SahinCAKIR70414/status/1816969646140182938 )
Hay dudas sobre la datación, pero podría ser cierto. Conviene saber si en la clasificación taxonómica, se incluye en la subespecie el neanderthensis o sapiens o son Homo sapiens y Homo neanderthalensis sin subespecie.
"It is important to know whether Sapiens' taxonomic classification includes Neanderthensis"
TESTABLE:
Also, apart from Figures 3 and 4, if additional genomic data suggest a discontinuity between European pre-140 ka and post-140 ka hominins such as;
- between the Altamura skeleton from Italy >130 ka old and Krapina Neanderthals from Croatia 130-120 ka old,
- or between the Suard hominins and Bourgeois-Delaunay Neanderthals (Figure 9), the formers are younger than 163 ka and the latters are 127-116 ka in age [95].
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Ecology