We know we’re talking about something big
Professors Lee Berger and Francis Thackeray are walking around smiling from ear to ear. They know something that they are not prepared to reveal — yet.
Why the secrecy? Simply, when a major scientific breakthrough is made, it is essential to first fully describe it to the scientific community. A peer-review process is completed and publication in an international scientific journal acts as a seal of authenticity and scientific rigour. Prior publication of any kind might diffuse both the significance of the discovery and the perceived veracity of the subject matter.
That’s why whatever has been discovered in South Africa must remain a secret.
But here’s what we do know. We’re talking palaeoanthropology, a discipline in which South Africa increasingly leads the world.
It was at the University of the Witwatersrand that Raymond Dart presented the Taung Child and hypothesised that it was our bipedal ancestor. In 2006, Lee Berger solved the world’s oldest murder case when he found puncture marks and incisions in the eye sockets, proving that the Taung child had been carried away by a bird of prey and dumped. In 1947, at Sterkfontein Caves, Robert Broom discovered “Mrs Ples”, (now thought to be an adolescent “Master Ples”). “Mrs Ples”, in turn, gave credence to Dart’s hypothesis that the ancestors of all humankind could be traced back to Africa.
It was also under the umbrella of Wits that Ron Clarke, Nkwane Molefe and Phologo Motsumi unearthed the 3million-year-old, almost complete, Australopithecus skeleton named “Little Foot” in the Sterkfontein grotto. And it is Wits professor emeritus Philip Tobias who has given us so much insight into the meaning of these and the more than 800 other hominin fossil discoveries associated with the unique World Heritage Site, now known as the Cradle of Humankind.
These great discoveries, along with others elsewhere on the African continent, led to the now scientifically accepted fact that humankind has its origins on the African continent. Some maintain that the epicentre is actually in South Africa and point to our prolific fossil record as evidence. Whatever the truth, no matter how far people have managed to distance themselves from Africa, we can all trace our roots back here. So the smiles on the faces of the two professors must be due to something other than a reconfirmation of these truths.
The science and technology department is leading the way in this area on behalf of the government.
This much can be revealed: new fossil discoveries have been made by Berger in the Cradle of Humankind. The discovery was disclosed to Parliament a few months ago. President Jacob Zuma recently took a break from his busy schedule to visit Wits to view these new items. So, we know we’re talking about something big. So big, the paleontological world is buzzing with excitement and there is widespread speculation that they will provide new clues to the evolutionary puzzle.
But none of this brings us any closer to answering the question: what precisely has been found?
A possible pointer lies in the involvement of Thackeray. The professor has increasingly focused his interest on the field of variability, in size and shape, examining the areas of human evolution where the boundaries start to break down. Modern humans share 98% of their genes with chimpanzees. Studies involving the rate of mutation of DNA have produced a virtual molecular clock, indicating that the chimpanzee/human split occurred somewhere between 5million and 7million years ago. Subsequently, the hominins also split into branches. Several different hominin species have been found at Sterkfontein alone and three major tool cultures have been identified.
The classification of human ancestors has become a major field of inquiry and it is known that Thackeray is working with advanced computer programmes to quantify probabilities as a means of establishing relationships that might have existed between groups as they evolved.
But what is the significance of this? Well, if it is correct that we are but one branch of a hominin “bush”, we could, theoretically, by means of reconstructive DNA, reconstitute the identity of a newly identified branch. However, that possibility is elusive because ancient DNA degrades into multitudinous fragments.
But I am not a paleoanthropolo- gist and, like you, must therefore wait patiently, possibly until early next year, to learn the real reason for the grins on the faces of these remarkable scientists and their associates. Meanwhile, we can all smile at our good fortune to live in a country so rich in heritage, with such remarkable scientists.
Read all 1 comments