Isn't it logical that oldest life forms are under Antartica, not africa?

Question

Leakey and son are full of it, in my opinion. Probably well preserved as well.

Answer 1

The Earth began as a twinkle in the Solar Nebula's eye some 4.5 billion years ago and it - along with the rest of the planets, asteroids, meteors, comets - formed, it is thought, through the tendency of matter to clump together, ever more until finally there were substantial bodies, the planets and their moons, sweeping up all left-overs in their orbits. During this era, approximately one billion years long, the newly-borning Earth was pummeled mercilessly by these left-overs. This was the so-called "Hadean Period" (and well named at that!), a "hell-ish" time indeed when the Earth's surface was periodically broiled, flash-fried so to speak. Incoming asteroids of sufficient size would actually vaporize, themselves and the part of the surface they impacted and this would turn into a seering plasma that would tsusami around the globe - not a pretty picture. Not to mention volcanic eruptions.

Answer 2

well actualy there are soem theories dthat becasue of platectonics or global re positioning, that antartica was originally where atlantis was, and remains ofthe most advanced civilization the world has known lies under the ice. most serious scientists regard this as somethignfor the weekly world news tabloid, but it is interesting. however, i can think of no logical reason for it to be in antartica over africa or europe or any other place on earth for that matter. you have to understand how fossils work, for every one "lucy" that is found it is likely there are hundreds more undiscovered and probably thousands more that left no fossil trace. conversely, it is also possible that she was one of a kind and her discovery was like winning the lottery. so basically, anything could be anywhere, or nowhere at all. i do find it interesting however that three of the worlds major religions have africa or at least that region as the site of creation

Answer 3

Elaborate please. I can see no reason why that would be "logical." 250 million years ago, the earth was one giant "super continent" called "Pangaea." Africa was situated in the middle of this enormous land mass, almost bisected by the equator, so it would be logical that a lot of life forms would be concentrated here. This was right before the advent of the dinosaurs. This super continent began breaking up 180 million years ago. Antarctica was still very far south on the Pangaea continent, and would not have been as densely populated with life forms because of the colder environment. And if you mean "humanoid" life forms, well, Africa is where apes evolved (Africa stayed pretty much where it was when the continents began to drift, so the climatic environment remained very stable) and, so, that is where our ancestors evolved.

Answer 4

Uh, doesn't seem logical to me. Do you perhaps want to give some reasons so we can judge if you are just another crackpot, or perhaps someone with a reasonable viewpoint?

And, do you perhaps mean early human life? (Leakey is famous for his fossil finds of early humans in Africa) Life forms appear everywhere as far back as we can see in the fossil record, no one claims the remains of the oldest life forms are in Africa. If you speak of human life, perhaps the fact that humans are spectacularly unsuited to live in cold climates might suggest that a tropical climate is the likely origin? (humans living in cold regions are dependent on their culture for fire, clothing, and shelter. I do not see how they could have evolved in that environment, it seems much more likely they migrated there)

Answer 5

I think it may be more accurate to ask your question another way:

Is it possible for fossils far older than any currently known to lie under the perpetual ice fields of Antarctica? If this is the question, then I would have to say "Yes, absolutely."

Who knows what might be found under the ice if it was possible to do extensive excavations in the Antarctic? Since humans have never been able to unwittingly destroy potentially valuable paleontological or archaeological finds there, it is extremely possible that a random excavation could uncover a complete dinosaur skeleton, a rock bearing the impression of billion-year cells, etc.

Answer 6

Logical how? Why would the oldest life even be found on land? And if it were, it could likely be on any continent, considering Pangea and all.

Also...no one is saying the oldest life forms are in Africa, just the oldest humans.

Answer 7

The oldest life forms have been found in Greenland, but it was the many and varied environments of the rift valley in East Africa that led to the evolution of hominins and eventually Homo Sapiens Sapiens (man).

Answer 8

Look up Pangea the Supercontinent and all life began in Africa and the Middle East....after Pangea separated...You will find much older species at the deepest depths of the oceans that have never been classified.

Answer 9

Long before Pangea, there were other disconnected continents which eventually collided to form Pangea. Life existed billions of years before this. There are stromatolites (algal mats) that are billions of years old. I do agree that the obsession with Africa as the origin of mankind is unfounded and that those who believe it do so largely out of faith and not science in my opinion. Members of the genus Homo (Homo georgicus, if not others) moved out of Africa 2 million years ago.

Answer 10

the oldest life forms i do not think are not in Africa but the oldest human remains were found on Africa