A skull that rewrites the history of man

It has long been agreed that Africa was the sole cradle of human evolution. Then these bones were found in Georgia...

The conventional view of human evolution and how early man colonised the world has been thrown into doubt by a series of stunning palaeontological discoveries "This suggests some kind of social organisation based on mutual care..."suggesting that Africa was not the sole cradle of humankind. Scientists have found a handful of ancient human skulls at an archaeological site two hours from the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, that suggest a Eurasian chapter in the long evolutionary story of man.


The skulls, jawbones and fragments of limb bones suggest that our ancient human ancestors migrated out of Africa far earlier than previously thought and spent a long evolutionary interlude in Eurasia – before moving back into Africa to complete the story of man.

Experts believe fossilised bones unearthed at the medieval village of Dmanisi in the foothills of the Caucuses, and dated to about 1.8 million years ago, are the oldest indisputable remains of humans discovered outside of Africa.

But what has really excited the researchers is the discovery that these early humans (or "hominins") are far more primitive-looking than the Homo erectus humans that were, until now, believed to be the first people to migrate out of Africa about 1 million years ago.

The Dmanisi people had brains that were about 40 per cent smaller than those of Homo erectus and they were much shorter in stature than classical H. erectus skeletons, according to Professor David Lordkipanidze, general director of the Georgia National Museum. "Before our findings, the prevailing view was that humans came out of Africa almost 1 million years ago, that they already had sophisticated stone tools, and that their body anatomy was quite advanced in terms of brain capacity and limb proportions. But what we are finding is quite different," Professor Lordkipanidze said.

"The Dmanisi hominins are the earliest representatives of our own genus – Homo – outside Africa, and they represent the most primitive population of the species Homo erectus to date. They might be ancestral to all later Homo erectus populations, which would suggest a Eurasian origin of Homo erectus."

Speaking at the British Science Festival in Guildford, where he gave the British Council lecture, Professor Lordkipanidze raised the prospect that Homo erectus may have evolved in Eurasia from the more primitive-looking Dmanisi population and then migrated back to Africa to eventually give rise to our own species, Homo sapiens – modern man.

"The question is whether Homo erectus originated in Africa or Eurasia, and if in Eurasia, did we have vice-versa migration? This idea looked very stupid a few years ago, but today it seems not so stupid," he told the festival.

The scientists have discovered a total of five skulls and a solitary jawbone. It is clear that they had relatively small brains, almost a third of the size of modern humans. "They are quite small. Their lower limbs are very human and their upper limbs are still quite archaic and they had very primitive stone tools," Professor Lordkipanidze said. "Their brain capacity is about 600 cubic centimetres. The prevailing view before this discovery was that the humans who first left Africa had a brain size of about 1,000 cubic centimetres."

The only human fossil to predate the Dmanisi specimens are of an archaic species Homo habilis, or "handy man", found only in Africa, which used simple stone tools and lived between about 2.5 million and 1.6 million years ago.

"I'd have to say, if we'd found the Dmanisi fossils 40 years ago, they would have been classified as Homo habilis because of the small brain size. Their brow ridges are not as thick as classical Homo erectus, but their teeth are more H. erectus like," Professor Lordkipanidze said. "All these finds show that the ancestors of these people were much more primitive than we thought. I don't think that we were so lucky as to have found the first travellers out of Africa. Georgia is the cradle of the first Europeans, I would say," he told the meeting.

"What we learnt from the Dmanisi fossils is that they are quite small – between 1.44 metres to 1.5 metres tall. What is interesting is that their lower limbs, their tibia bones, are very human-like so it seems they were very good runners," he said.

He added: "In regards to the question of which came first, enlarged brain size or bipedalism, maybe indirectly this information calls us to think that body anatomy was more important than brain size. While the Dmanisi people were almost modern in their body proportions, and were highly efficient walkers and runners, their arms moved in a different way, and their brains were tiny compared to ours. continues here

Perhaps we shall never know, never know the truth, certainly important aspects, certain truths concerning our evolution are denied us, it finds, don’t you think, the agenda, this ridiculous one-worldism, this enforced charade of sameness, this rush to beat down distinctiveness and render uniqueness obsolete. They tell us now, that no, we did not hail from Africa, that it was not Homo erectus that first used tools, now we have “Dmanisi hominins”, it would seem that this group, even at that time, had created a community, it would appear an altruistic community, a trait shared predominantly by Caucasians and, Mongoloid or what we refer to here at least, as Orientals.

Negroids on the other hand do not share to the same degree, an altruistic disposition, of note also here, is the use of tools, yet I shall not get into here the anthropological differences between human sub-divisions, suffice to say that even today, valid scientific data and indeed potential advance is thwarted in the name of political correctness. This of course enables the agenda makers free reign to peddle the monstrous lie that we are all the same, save for pigmentation, however, individuals such as myself are repressed but we are not wrong, they on the other hand, have a really quite terrible job and must constantly close the lid upon truth, lest it leak out to the wider world.

No, we are not the same, far from it, we have evolved differently, separately, yet we are forced now to live together in unwanted co-existence, the shame of it is, at least currently, that it is the non-Caucasian races that would most benefit from disclosure, it is they at this moment, at least medically that stand to gain, yet treatment and drugs are denied them in order to prevent lay man realisation. Strangely at street-level the common man knows the truth, regardless of any laws, marked difference is marked difference, however, it is interesting this article in that it gives the truth to original anthropological theory, rather than the Franz Boas duplicity of today.

In much of what passes for the scientific community, even the word Caucasian is taboo and individuals from all fields, must word their conclusions carefully, yet you the people truly believe you live in a democracy, really believe that this, this is freedom. If any system is correct, then why must it fear debate, close down dissent and repress dissidents, surely debating in the full glare of the general public is the way, so that our argument can be shown to be the lie they say it is.

Would that they were honest I would have respect at least, yet they repress, cajole and gaol, this is not the way of a free society, still even in this article, they state that, although having evolved in Eurasia, that we then trekked to Africa, yet there is simply no proof of this, no proof at all and why, why on earth, would a fairly advanced species choose to do so. This finding turns Boas theory on its head in that rather than we having evolved from Homo erectus, we may have evolved separately, an unsurprising finding quite frankly.

Some consider it a racial slur, yet it is indisputable fact, that Negroid advancement was not on a par with any other race and even until fairly modern times, it was a primitive race, yet other races advanced ,some markedly and even today, the distinction is still notable. Sub-Saharan Africa is supported by the world it simply cannot function on its own, at least in these pseudo-compassionate times, for we augment their fate, simply by our meddling involvement. So does intelligence play a part or is such a notion simply, as they call it today racist, certainly even egalitarians cannot argue away the fact that the frontal lobes of both Negroes and Caucasians are different, yet what exactly does the frontal lobe do, well in simple terms it controls executive function, that is to say, it helps inhibit anti-group behaviours and governing such factors as, decision making, assessing in all its forms and impulse inhibition.

So it can be argued for instance that the Caucasian is able to resist temptation more easily than say the Negroid, this has implications for law-enforcement, inter-group association and even educational or academic ability; yet again such factors are never taken into account. Brain size does indeed factor in intelligence, the greater the volume, the greater the intelligence of the individual concerned, Negro brains are averagely smaller than that of Caucasians. However, I could go into different aspects all day and time inhibits, suffice to say ours differences are palpable, perhaps after all we have always been Europeans.

Related Posts by Categories