From Popular Archaeology:
Now researchers Günter Landeck and Joan Garcia Garriga report, for the first time, evidence of early human butchery in the form of cut marks on animal bones and intentional hammerstone-related bone breakage. These human-modified bones were recovered in a small faunal subsample excavated from levels with simple ‘Mode 1’ stone tools. The butchered assemblage was found during fieldwork and surveying of ancient riverbanks and channel erosion sediments. The report authors state that the frequent occurrence of butchery traces on bones of large-sized herd animals, such as an ancient species of Bison, may suggest that the early human occupiers of the site had an enhanced need for meat because of changes resulting in a depletion of nutritive plants in winter. The study authors further note that early access to the carcasses before they were consumed by other carnivores made it possible for the early humans to acquire a sufficient amount of meat for subsistence. More.
Doubtless a good find. But what is the precise relationship between the claim that these were “humans” and insistence of “different human species” in other reports? Recently one Darwin defender sniffed that the definition of “species” has been a conundrum for 300 years.
If so, that’s bad news for his point of view; worse, the news is starting to get out. No shame in not knowing, but insisting on being the expert while not knowing is pride preceding a fall.
Follow UD News at Twitter!
See also: Are human groups extinct if their genes live in us?
“Speciation” means what exactly? No one can define it but it is the basis of Darwinian evolution.
Meat eating speeded human face evolution?
and
Stasis: Life goes on but evolution does not happen much
Follow UD News at Twitter!