Re: Height of Turkana Boy?

Ralph L Holloway (
Wed, 15 Nov 1995 23:25:55 -0500

On 14 Nov 1995, Mithrandir wrote:

> Thanks for all the replys to my question. I should have read
> more of the book before I asked. Most of the answers is found
> later in the book. And the 12 years statement is corrected to
> 9 years. Originally a human growth pattern was assumed, but then
> they referred to studies documenting a growth pattern for early
> erectines as somewhere between human and chimp. Thus the new age
> of 9 years.

Remember that the Nariokotome chapter written on aging of the skeletal
materials also includes an analysios of the dental remains, and the two
lines of evidence are suggesting quite different ages. The dental stuff
gives earlier aging while the postcraial long bone evidence suggests a
later date. No one really knows which to accept, and it would be simply
premature to accept one without hedging about the other.
Ralph Holloway