4 ms·

African Fossils

71 points by showwebgl 13y ago

melkisch 13y ago
3D is getting very interesting. I guess a lot of researchers can play with these embeds from across the world.
netcan 13y ago
This feels like something that is really in line with early ideas of what the internet/www should be. When reading about some piece of science I often wish I could gauge how certain science is about something and why. Human evolution is always going to be a fascinating topic. It's got a lot of uncertainties, contradictory theories and less-than-certain facts that make it into pop science. Do we have hundreds of high quality fossils for some homo species or is it just a few skull fragments? It's great to be able to interact with evidence/finds like this directly.
- tjr 13y ago
  Do we have hundreds of high quality fossils for some homo species or is it just a few skull fragments? I often wonder in a similar direction. For example, this headline from a few days ago: "Horrific FLESH-EATING PLATYPUS once terrorised Australia" ...based on finding a single tooth, it seems. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/05/new_platypus_species/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/05/new_platypus_species...
jcmoscon 13y ago
I'm wondering how they end up with numbers like 17 million. Does anybody know?
- steeve 13y ago
  Most likely thanks to Carbon Dating [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating
  - jofer 13y ago
    No. Carbon dating is only reliable back to ~50ka (50,000 years before present), at most ~100ka. For older things, you're typically dating the formation of a mineral grain. Common methods are Potassium/Argon and Uranium/Lead dating. The ages are based on the stratigraphy that the fossils are in. We can "easily" correlate stratigraphy across wide areas, but most sedimentary rocks are hard to date. For these particular fossils, the stratigraphy happens to contain a lot of volcanic ash units that can be directly dated. In most cases, we use the fossils present (biostratigraphy) to correlate with other units that can be directly dated. The exact numerical age is based on dating things like feldspar grains in volcanic units that can be dated with K/Ar dating or zircons in volcanics that can be dated with U/Pb, etc, etc.
cyrillevincey 13y ago
Very nice 3D use case.
Gauhier 13y ago
Great stuff! Would also be great to have your own x-ray results in a embeddable 3D some day...Imagine going to the dentist and say:"want to have a 3D view of my mouth ? Go on www..." Or share on Facebook a 3D version of the leg you broke after a skiing session...etc
Fauntleroy 13y ago
I'd love to see something like this expanded to all fossils and artifacts. I can only imagine how free and easy access to this kind of information would help aid in archaeological research.
duopixel 13y ago
The skull labeled as Homo Sapiens is actually a Homo Erectus, which precedes us by 1.5 million years. Amazing athletic performance, crude tools and possible domestication of fire.
- freshyill 13y ago
  One look at that and I was sure theres on way that's a modern human skull. For reference, here's a reconstruction: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Homo_erectus_new.JPG http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Homo_erec...
cardamomo 13y ago
An intriguing experiment! But the taxonomic filters could use a little refinement. The application allows me to select incompatible filters, such as "Genus: gorilla" and "Species: sapiens".
ginko 13y ago
Is it just me or is the lighting really dark for many of these fossils?
- _random_ 13y ago
  That's to give them Quake-style vibe!
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

71 points by showwebgl 13y ago

3D is getting very interesting. I guess a lot of researchers can play with these embeds from across the world.

This feels like something that is really in line with early ideas of what the internet/www should be. When reading about some piece of science I often wish I could gauge how certain science is about something and why. Human evolution is always going to be a fascinating topic. It's got a lot of uncertainties, contradictory theories and less-than-certain facts that make it into pop science. Do we have hundreds of high quality fossils for some homo species or is it just a few skull fragments? It's great to be able to interact with evidence/finds like this directly.

tjr 13y ago
Do we have hundreds of high quality fossils for some homo species or is it just a few skull fragments? I often wonder in a similar direction. For example, this headline from a few days ago: "Horrific FLESH-EATING PLATYPUS once terrorised Australia" ...based on finding a single tooth, it seems. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/05/new_platypus_species/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/05/new_platypus_species...

jcmoscon 13y ago

I'm wondering how they end up with numbers like 17 million. Does anybody know?

steeve 13y ago
Most likely thanks to Carbon Dating [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating
- jofer 13y ago
  No. Carbon dating is only reliable back to ~50ka (50,000 years before present), at most ~100ka. For older things, you're typically dating the formation of a mineral grain. Common methods are Potassium/Argon and Uranium/Lead dating. The ages are based on the stratigraphy that the fossils are in. We can "easily" correlate stratigraphy across wide areas, but most sedimentary rocks are hard to date. For these particular fossils, the stratigraphy happens to contain a lot of volcanic ash units that can be directly dated. In most cases, we use the fossils present (biostratigraphy) to correlate with other units that can be directly dated. The exact numerical age is based on dating things like feldspar grains in volcanic units that can be dated with K/Ar dating or zircons in volcanics that can be dated with U/Pb, etc, etc.

cyrillevincey 13y ago

Very nice 3D use case.

Gauhier 13y ago

Great stuff! Would also be great to have your own x-ray results in a embeddable 3D some day...Imagine going to the dentist and say:"want to have a 3D view of my mouth ? Go on www..." Or share on Facebook a 3D version of the leg you broke after a skiing session...etc

Fauntleroy 13y ago

I'd love to see something like this expanded to all fossils and artifacts. I can only imagine how free and easy access to this kind of information would help aid in archaeological research.

duopixel 13y ago

The skull labeled as Homo Sapiens is actually a Homo Erectus, which precedes us by 1.5 million years. Amazing athletic performance, crude tools and possible domestication of fire.

freshyill 13y ago
One look at that and I was sure theres on way that's a modern human skull. For reference, here's a reconstruction: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Homo_erectus_new.JPG http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Homo_erec...

cardamomo 13y ago

An intriguing experiment! But the taxonomic filters could use a little refinement. The application allows me to select incompatible filters, such as "Genus: gorilla" and "Species: sapiens".

ginko 13y ago

Is it just me or is the lighting really dark for many of these fossils?

_random_ 13y ago
That's to give them Quake-style vibe!

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]