Scientific Indian: 2010

The film begins with glimpses of Raymond, a Linux IPO, Torvalds, the idea of Open Source, Perens, Stallman, then sets the historical stage in the early days of hackers and computer hobbyists when code was shared freely. It discusses how change came in 1978 as Bill Gates, in his Open Letter to Hobbyists, pointedly prodded hobbyists to pay up. Stallman relates his struggles with closed-source vendors at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab, leading to his departure to focus on the development of free software, and the GNU project.

Torvalds describes the development of the Linux kernel, the GNU/Linux naming controversy, Linux's further evolution and its commercialization.

Raymond and Stallman clarify the philosophy of free software vs Communism and capitalism, and development stages of Linux.

Michael Tiemann discusses how he met Stallman in 1987, got an early version of Stallman's GCC, and founded Cygnus Solutions.

Larry Augustin describes combining GNU software with a normal PC to create a Unix-like workstation which cost one third the price of a Sun workstation even though it was twice as powerful. He relates his early dealings with venture capitalists, the eventual capitalization and commodification of Linux for his own company, VA Linux, and its IPO.

Brian Behlendorf, one of the original developers of the Apache HTTP Server, explains how he started to exchange patches for the NCSA Web-Server daemon with other developers and how this led to the release of "a patchy" webserver, Apache.

Frank Hecker of Netscape discusses how it came to be that Netscape executives released the source code for Netscape's browser, one of the signal events which made Open Source a force to be reckoned with by business executives, the mainstream media, and the public at large.^[1] This point was only shown to be more true after the film's release as the Netscape source code would eventually become the Firefox browser, reclaiming a large percentage of market share from Microsoft's Internet Explorer.

The film also documents the scope of the first full-scale LinuxWorld Summit conference, with appearances by Linus Torvalds and Larry Augustin on the keynote stage.

Much of the footage for the film was shot in Silicon Valley.

Watch online-

Friday, January 29, 2010

The Code

Synopsis

In 1991, a 20-year old Linus Torvalds, a thin, bespectacled, Swedish- speaking Finnish computer science student sends a posting to an Internet newsgroup asking for advice on how to make a better operating system. His project is a hobby, he says, and would never become ‘big and professional’. But in ten years he and his loose alliance of hackers all over the world creates an operating system – Linux – that challenges Windows 2000 for the server market and is now poised to dominate the next generation of handheld and desktop computers. What makes Linux different, and deeply troubling for traditional software companies, is that no one owns it. Every user is free to adapt it in any way they wish, as long as they pass it on to others on the same terms.

The Code presents the first decade of Linux from 1991 to 2001. Besides Torvalds, it includes many of his closest allies in development process, that is nowadays seen as the greatest success story of the Internet culture. Eventually, Linux becomes a viable business solution within the computer industry. Media loves the story of ‘a single hacker against the forces of darkness’. ‘Linux’ becomes a catch phrase. Torvalds turns into an international media star. No more a shy nerd, but a relaxed, witty media performer par excellence. Linus is a Jesus for a politician, respected and adored by both Linux enthusiasts, the counter-culture – and the big businessmen. A rare combination, this time or any other. But even after all this attention Linus Torvalds remains, as a person, an enigma. When interviewed in the media, he is always asked the same questions and usually giving the same answers too. We think we know him, but do we really? Why did he put his code into the Net for free, initially? Many can still not understand it. Maybe because ‘given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow’, giving a way to a better product? Or is there something more to it?

The hero of the film is the archetype of our times: the programmer. In The Code programming is seen partially as an art form. Like artists, programmers will do it even if they do not get any money. Through Torvalds and his cohort, following the code development process, we get into the mind-set of a programmer – and the communication between programmers. Operating from his study in San Jose, California, Linus is the benevolent dictator among hundreds of Linux developers around the world. This room is the centre of their universe. Everything goes through Linus, or his right hand man Alan Cox, a Welshman. Developers compete in order to get their solutions and improvements accepted by Linus. He openly admits that he developed only 2 % or 3 % of the code in the beginning, and that he built upon the work by earlier programmers, like Richard Stallman. Developers are like monks in their virtual monastery. Their change of e-mails through the years opens the Linux saga in the film like a letter novel. Leadership in Linux universe is about getting people to trust enough that they take advice, making them to do things because of their own reasons, not due to any external pressure. Linus is strict, loyal, dictatorial, humble and positive, all at the same time. And this is the key to the fulfilment of the collective dream. Resembling cybernetics and communism, it would have never been built without teamwork, collective responsibility – and centralized planning.

Along the way, Microsoft recognizes competition, and throws some mccarthyian dirt towards Linux, calling it un-American. Regardless of this, Wall Street applauds, and for a brief time Linux is the cream of the crop at the stock exchange market. What is more important and revolutionary, the Linux phenomenon makes a lot of ground in Asia and Africa, where an open source code and a free operating system are something concrete, not just fancy, elitist idealism. The process started in Europe and the United States, but it is bound to be completed somewhere else.

The Code is about the human urge to share and exchange, to achieve something through collaboration, the profit motive not being the dominating factor. Linux and the free software movement have showed new ways to make profit in computer industry, while raising heated debates on the ethics of business and the old issue of freedom of speech. In the end, The Code tells a key story of the digital age, a symbolic saga about capitalism during the last fin de siècle of the second millennium and the early steps of the third one.

Hannu Puttonen

Watch Online-

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Finding New Worlds in this Universe

Finding New Worlds in this Universe

Watch online

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Boldly Go to explore this universe

Boldly Go to explore this universe

Watch online

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Space - Black Holes

Space - Black Holes

Watch Online-

Monday, January 25, 2010

Space Travel - Staying Alive

Space Travel - Staying Alive

Watch Online-

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Are we Alone in this Universe?

Are we Alone in this Universe?

Watch online

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Who's Afraid of a Big Black Hole?

Who's Afraid of a Big Black Hole

Black holes are one of the most destructive forces in the universe, capable of tearing a planet apart and swallowing an entire star. Yet scientists now believe they could hold the key to answering the ultimate question - what was there before the Big Bang?

The trouble is that researching them is next to impossible. Black holes are by definition invisible and there's no scientific theory able to explain them. Despite these obvious obstacles, Horizon meets the astronomers attempting to image a black hole for the very first time and the theoretical physicists getting ever closer to unlocking their mysteries. It's a story that takes us into the heart of a black hole and to the very edge of what we think we know about the universe.

Watch Online-

Friday, January 22, 2010

How to Improve Your Memory?

Watch Online -

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Any relation between Race and Intelligence?

In 2007, Nobel Prize winning US scientist James Watson was quoted referring to research suggesting that black people were less intelligent than other races. His comments caused a storm of controversy, Watson was condemned.

Although he apologised for the offence he caused, his public engagements were cancelled and he left his British speaking tour in disgrace.

Meanwhile, right wing websites hailed him as the new Galileo - a martyr to political correctness that was concealing the fact that there is indeed evidence that shows different races score differently in IQ tests. But are the tests biased? Is race really a scientific category at all?

In this documentary, part of the season Race: Science's Last Taboo, Rageh Omaar sets out to find out the truth, meeting scientists who believe the research supports the view that races can be differentiated as well as those who vehemently oppose this view. By daring to ask the difficult questions, Omaar is able to explode the myths about race and IQ and reveal what he thinks are important lessons for society.

Watch online -

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Is it Better to Be Mixed Race?

Today, many accept racial mixing as the inevitable result of globalisation. Scientists are fascinated by theories that this mixing could lead to a genetic advantage. Despite this, the reality is that historical misunderstanding of racial differences sparked Hitler’s desire for a superior race and led to the Jewish Holocaust. With an increased knowledge of genetic diversity, scientific evidence now reveals that had Hitler got his wish the result might not have been superiority but instead a weaker race.

A Modern Genetic Perspective

For over a century animal and plant biologists have known that mixing two diverse strains of a plant or animal can result in more vigorous and healthy offspring. This “hybrid vigour” was first shown by American Plant Scientist George Shull at the Station for Experimental Evolution, Cold Spring Harbor, in 1908 when he crossed two different corn strains resulting in a more vigorous hybrid.

So, could mixed race children gain a noticeable genetic advantage and show degree of hybrid vigour?

Hybrid Vigour

Hybrid offspring are called the first filial or “F1” generation, hence the term gardeners are familiar with when buying seed; ‘F1 hybrid’. To produce F1 hybrids, the farmer crosses two pure-bred parent strains. Often, these parent stocks are relatively small populations and hence are genetically rather uniform. For this reason, the hybrid offspring tend not only to be more vigorous than their parents, but are also relatively uniform in appearance, a second desirable trait.

How far does hybrid vigour extend?

Hybrid vigour represents just one point on a spectrum of how related two parents are.

At one end of the spectrum is inbreeding, where the parents are closely related. This tends to produce very unfit offspring, many of which die young. Better is to choose an unrelated partner. When the partner is not only unrelated but comes from a different population, this is like being ‘super-unrelated’ and can lead to hybrid vigour. However, there must be an end-point where the parents are too different. Most obviously this end-points comes when the parents are so unrelated they are actually different species. Thus, when a donkey and a horse mate the offspring are called mules. Mules are interesting because the show some elements of hybrid vigour, being strong and hard-working, but they are also infertile.

What is the basis of ‘Hybrid Vigour’?

There are two main components of hybrid vigour, referred to as ‘outbreeding’ and ‘heterozygote advantage’. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes containing about 30,000 genes. Only the sex chromosomes break the ‘pairs’ rule, women having two ‘X’ chromosomes and men one ‘X’ and one ‘Y.

If you carry two copies of a gene that differ slightly in how they work, it is a bit like having an extra channel on your TV set: you don’t have to watch it but there may be times when the extra channel comes in handy. It gives you extra flexibility. An individual who has two identical copies of a gene (good or bad) is called a homozygote, while someone who has two copies that differ is called a ‘heterozygote’.

The benefit of outbreeding

Broken genes are usually rare, so to inherit two broken copies of the same gene is unlucky and can result in serious health problems. However, the chances increase considerably if your parents are related. With more genes that are identical by descent, a child will have more genes where both copies are broken.

If inbreeding is bad, outbreeding, marrying an extremely unrelated partner, should be good for the same reason. With a less related partner, the number of genes in your children that are identical by descent is reduced, and with it the chance that a gene has two broken copies. It is not that your children will inherit fewer broken copies in total, just that every broken copy has a much better chance of finding itself partnered with a good copy.

The benefits of heterozygous advantage

Outbreeding can be thought of as avoiding the bad effects of having two broken copies of the same gene. Heterozygous advantage deals with the extra flexibility one may get from having two good, but slightly different copies of the same gene.

Is there hybrid vigour in humans?

So, what happens when people from different human populations marry - is this likely to bring the benefits discussed above? Yes, it probably will, says Amos, both by reducing the number of gene-pairs that are broken and by increasing the number that are ‘both-good-but-different’. Combined, the result should be, on average, children who are genetically healthy, for example, who are less likely to catch ‘flu or who live a little bit longer. However, the size of this effect is extremely difficult to measure because so much of a human’s fate is due to the environment: having good genes won’t stop you getting run over by a drunken motorist!

The Future

In the 21st Century, as more and more populations move and mix with each other, scientists predict that genetic heterozygosity will increase. However, it won’t increase indefinitely, but should reach a peak and then either stabilise or decrease depending on how future generations choose to live.

Watch online -

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Last Human Standing

NARRATOR: Humans: without a doubt, the smartest animal on Earth. Yet we're unmistakably tied to our ape origins. Millions of years ago, we were apes, living ape lives in Africa. So how did we get from that to this? What happened? What set us on the path to humanity?

The questions are huge. But at last, there are answers.

More than 6,000,000 years ago we took that first step to separate from the apes. Since then, there have been at least 20 types of human ancestor in our family tree. Some of them were on their way to being us; others were evolutionary dead ends.

DONALD JOHANSON (Arizona State University, Institute of Human Origins): As recently as 50,000 years ago, there were probably four different kinds of humans living at the same time. Yet today, we are a species alone.

NARRATOR: Why did we survive and all the others disappear? New discoveries are shining light on the final stages of our evolution. We're finding out where our species, Homo sapiens, came from.

CURTIS MAREAN (Arizona State University, Institute of Human Origins): The genetic record shows that all modern humans are descended from a small population of approximately 600 breeding individuals.

NARRATOR: And we are discovering how they spread through the world, pushing out other ancient humans like the Neanderthal.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN (Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology): Neanderthals were very successful humans. They have lived in Europe for maybe 300-, 400,000 years, but eventually they were replaced by modern humans.

NARRATOR: But why were they replaced by modern humans? The mystery of the Neanderthal disappearance is finally being solved, as the secrets of their genetic code are unlocked.

We're discovering exactly what made them different from us, and how we're unique. So join us, as we explore the origins of our own species. Find out why we're the last human standing, right now on NOVA.

Major funding for NOVA is provided by the following:

(Pacific Life: music, whale and graphics)

Natural gas is a cleaner-burning fuel, yet a lot of natural gas has impurities like CO2 in it. Controlled Freeze Zone is a new technology being developed by ExxonMobil to remove the CO2 from the natural gas so we can safely store it where it won't get into the atmosphere. ExxonMobil is spending more than $100 million to build a plant that will demonstrate this process. I'm very optimistic about it, because this technology could be used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions significantly.

And Merrill Lynch Wealth Management. You can learn more at ml.com/help2.

And David H. Koch. And...

Discover new knowledge: HHMI.

And by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and viewers like you. Thank you.

NARRATOR: Imagine a world with only a tiny number of us in it, perhaps just a few thousand. A recently evolved species, we are completely at the mercy of the natural forces around us.

One-hundred-forty-thousand years ago, Homo sapiens teetered on the brink of extinction. New discoveries are revealing how, from these humble beginnings, we took over the planet, eventually replacing the other ancient humans who were already living there: Homo erectus and the Neanderthals.

DANIEL LIEBERMAN (Harvard University): Humans have a very intensive way of using the environment. Humans move into the Middle East, the Homo erectus goes extinct. When humans move in to Europe, the Neanderthals go extinct.

NARRATOR: For almost 400,000 years the Neanderthals lived in Ice Age Europe. Superb hunters, they had brains bigger than ours and a record of survival twice as long. They were the most advanced humans on Earth, until we arrived; and then they vanished. Why?

Finally, we're unearthing the answers. The remains of a 100,000-year-old child are revealing what we had that they didn't.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: ...essential to figure out what are the differences between the Neanderthals and us, to figure out what is special about us.

NARRATOR: Was it some new physical ability or was it a new way of thinking? These questions go to the heart of what makes us human.

Imagine the entire span of recorded human history, taking us back to the Egyptian pyramids, about 5,000 years. Double it: 10,000 years ago, when plants were domesticated and agriculture begins. Double it again: 20,000 years, to the time when Ice Age hunters paint stunning images on cave walls. And keep doubling, six more times, and we are finally entering the world of Homo erectus, the remarkable ancestor who pioneered what it means to be human.

Homo erectus appeared on the African plains almost 2,000,000 years ago. They were the first ancestors who had bodies like ours. They were hunter-gatherers and toolmakers, beings who lived in social groups and cared for each other.

The most famous Homo erectus is the fossil called Turkana Boy.

VIKTOR DEAK (Paleoartist): Well, Turkana Boy and his ancestors, they represent a threshold. They represent that point in our evolution when we were...we weren't quite fully a human but we were no longer an ape.

NARRATOR: Paleoartist Viktor Deak specializes in creating scientifically based sculptures of ancient humans from their fossil remains. As he reconstructs Turkana Boy's head, ape-like features emerge: heavy brow ridges, a protruding lower face, a skull still smaller than our own. But despite these differences Turkana Boy is definitely starting to look like a human being. And behind those eyes, his mind was becoming human too.

VIKTOR DEAK: I suspect that complex feelings and behaviors had their beginnings with Turkana Boy's kind, and that what it is to truly be human had its bubblings at that point.

NARRATOR: It was probably Homo erectus, almost 2,000,000 years ago, who first started to leave Africa. Ever since, Africa has been the engine of our evolution, pumping out wave after wave of ancient humans, who populated Europe and Asia. Settling in far-off places, they developed in their own special ways.

An early wave gave rise, in Indonesia, to the extraordinary Hobbit, perhaps a type of dwarf Homo erectus. Another wave took Homo erectus all the way to China where fossil remains have been dated to over 700,000 years ago. Soon after, another wave left Africa, this time, heading for Europe. This was the species that would one day give rise to the Neanderthals.

Ever since the first skull was discovered, in Heidelberg, Germany, they have been called Homo heidelbergensis. But almost nothing was known about them, until one extraordinary find was made.

Atapuerca in northern Spain: These rolling hills have turned out to be an archeological goldmine. When a railway was built, over a hundred years ago, it cut right through the hills. Archeologists later discovered this had exposed over a million years of ancient human habitation, including the oldest human remains in Europe.

Nearby, on the crest of one of the hills, they also found the entrance to some caves. To explore them took years, but it has been worth it.

They have discovered a labyrinth of chambers and corridors reaching far inside the hills. At the end of the labyrinth is one of the most inaccessible archeological sites in the world, a treasure trove of human fossils they call the "Pit of Bones."

JUAN LUIS ARSUAGA (The Complutense University of Madrid): This is the entrance to the whole system. The pit itself is very far from here. It is a long way; in some places you have to crawl. It is a difficult place to work.

NARRATOR: Today, it takes half an hour of walking, crawling and scrambling in the dark to reach the 50-foot vertical shaft that drops into the pit. But it took almost 10 years for the site to give up its secrets.

JUAN LUIS ARSUAGA: We started to find small pieces of human bones, difficult to recognize in the beginning because they were very fragmentary.

NARRATOR: But so many tiny fragments made them think they were on to something big.

JUAN LUIS ARSUAGA: Even without talking to each other, we started to think that maybe there were, down there, skeletons.

NARRATOR: As bone after bone came out of the pit, they realized they had not one, but many complete skeletons.

JUAN LUIS ARSUAGA: We have around 30 complete skeletons, half a million years old. And this is absolutely unique.

NARRATOR: These are the skeletons of the ancestors called Homo heidelbergensis, one of the earliest to populate Europe. But why were so many complete skeletons collected in one place? Juan Luis Arsuaga believes they were put there intentionally by their kin.

Half a million years ago, the Pit of Bones, now deep underground, had an opening to the surface. Perhaps Homo heidelbergensis dropped the bodies into the pit in a sort of primitive burial. And there is evidence it may have been ceremonial.

Along with the bones, Juan Luis found a single artifact, a hand ax made of pink quartz, a mineral which must have been brought from a long way away. The team called it Excalibur, after King Arthur's famous sword. They believe it was an offering: the first symbol ever found.

If this is right, here were beings with complex minds, capable of symbolism and belief.

JUAN LUIS ARSUAGA: Half a million years ago, in these European populations, there was planning, there was consciousness, there was a human mind, and there was also symbolic behavior.

NARRATOR: We used to think these qualities belonged only to us, Homo sapiens; that the earliest evidence for them was in the painted caves of southern France, just 30,000 years ago. But the extraordinary finds at Atapuerca may have pushed the beginnings of that mental evolution back almost half a million years. Homo heidelbergensis would continue to evolve, eventually becoming the species who would populate Europe, the Neanderthals.

Of all ancient humans, the Neanderthals were the closest to us. Their brains were slightly larger than ours. Their short, heavyset bodies helped them survive repeated ice ages. They were hunters, living off the big game that roamed the edges of the great ice sheets covering Europe and central Asia.

When Neanderthal fossils were first discovered, Darwin had yet to publish his theory of evolution. The idea that modern humans had descended from more primitive forms would generate furious controversy.

MICHEL TOUSSAINT (University of Liege): This is the skull of Engis 2. It is the first Neanderthal fossil ever found on Earth. It was discovered at the end of 1829, but back then people were not happy with the idea that this could be a human being, like us.

NARRATOR: Many claimed that the Neanderthals were just diseased, misshapen humans. Then, as evolutionary ideas took hold, people wondered if they were the missing link between us and the apes.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: If we go back to the beginning of the 20th century, Neanderthals were seen as sort of apelike creatures.

NARRATOR: But since then hundreds of fossil finds have revealed their physical similarities to us.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: After the '70s, there was a so-called "rehabilitation" of the Neanderthals. So we tend to see them in a more human way.

NARRATOR: But did they think and act like us?

Today, the remains of a young boy, who died 100,000 years ago, are helping researchers penetrate the mysteries of the Neanderthal mind.

The Meuse Valley in Belgium: It was caves and rock shelters here that gave up the very first Neanderthal fossils, 150 years ago. Today they are revealing deeper secrets of the Neanderthal world.

For over 20 years, Michel Toussaint and Dominique Bonjean have been excavating a cave called Scladina. One millimeter at a time, they've been sifting through the debris that once filled the cave. Their painstaking work paid off.

DOMINIQUE BONJEAN (Archéologie Andennaise): I've had the chance to be present when one of my students has discovered the Neanderthal child. And when we have come there and see that this piece was...we were so surprised! We couldn't believe it.

NARRATOR: What they uncovered was the jawbone of a young boy, 100,000 years old.

Nearby, they found more fragments and teeth, until they had almost a complete mouth.

Since then, they've been trying to reconstruct the life of the boy from Scladina. They know the woodlands and caves of the Meuse valley were his home. He probably lived here with his extended family. Already he would have been learning, from his father, the skills to become a hunter. But what else can we infer about his way of life?

His bones are full of clues, and new techniques are allowing scientists to decipher them.

Michel is taking a piece of the jaw to one of the few places in the world where the tests he needs can be done.

The Max Planck Institute, in Leipzig, Germany, is one of the world's foremost centers for human evolutionary studies. Here, the jawbone of the child from Scladina is put through a high-powered C.T. scan. This allows researchers to peer into the internal structure of the teeth and bone.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: So this is the mandible that was scanned yesterday, the Scladina mandible. And we have built up what we call a surface model, which is basically a virtual representation of the mandible in a computer. We can separate all the teeth from the bone in this specimen.

The features that we can explore show us how Neanderthal are similar to us in many aspects, but also how they are different.

NARRATOR: The teeth of children are among the most prized of all archaeological finds because only they can tell us how fast those children were growing up.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: If we look at the pattern of eruption of the teeth, the Scladina child, by modern standards, should be about 11 or 12 years old.

The second molar is almost completely erupted, but when we look at the internal structures of the enamel and dentine, it has been shown that it's in fact much younger. We know that this child died around eight years old.

NARRATOR: Although the boy from Scladina would have looked like us, he probably grew up much more quickly. That means he had much less time for brain development and learning.

But is it safe to assume the Neanderthals were less intelligent than we are? The crucial evidence comes from skulls. Endocasts, impressions taken from the inside of Neanderthal skulls, have revealed brains with many similarities to ours.

RALPH HOLLOWAY (Columbia University): When we look at the Neanderthal endocast, we find a frontal lobe that we can't really differentiate from modern Homo sapiens. The Broca's caps that have to do with the motor control, motor aspects of speech, are thoroughly human in terms of their form.

NARRATOR: So if the front of the Neanderthal brain is similar to ours, what about the rest of it?

Today scientists like Katerina Havarti are trying to measure fossil skulls with new precision. She uses a special instrument to digitize the skulls and create perfect three-dimensional images.

KATERINA HARVATI (Tübingen University): We've know for a long time that Neanderthals looked different from modern humans, ever since they were first discovered and described. But the question, then, become what does this difference actually mean?

NARRATOR: This is a digitized 3-D image of our own skull, with its characteristic high dome. By contrast, the Neanderthal skull is low and elongated, possibly indicating a different brain shape. The parts of the Neanderthal brain called the parietal and temporal lobes may have been slightly smaller. That small difference could have had a large impact on their mental ability.

DANIEL LIEBERMAN: There are regions of the parietal lobes and the temporal lobes that are very important in cognition, particularly in terms of language and memory and remembering spatial locations.

NARRATOR: The reduced size of those regions of Neanderthal brains might be a sign of limited thinking powers. But the boy from Scladina's jawbone has more to tell us about other limitations.

Back at the Max Planck Institute, Mike Richards is delving even deeper into the micro-structure of the bone, to find out about his diet. The food we eat leaves a chemical signature in our bodies. These signatures are incorporated into the protein of our bones.

MICHAEL RICHARDS (Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology): So what we do is we get the bone, and we take that protein out and measure those signatures. We can work backwards and say, "This is the food that this human ate over their lifetime."

NARRATOR: He's discovering that Neanderthals were almost exclusively meat eaters, although there were many fruits, berries and edible roots in their environment.

MIKE RICHARDS: We don't see any evidence that plant protein was at all important in their diet, and it doesn't look like they had marine food at all. They were hunting large herbivores like bison or reindeer and things like that.

NARRATOR: They were carnivores with a diet closer to that of a predator like a wolf than a human. And they showed few signs of change, no matter where they lived.

MIKE RICHARDS: So far, we've measured the type specimen from Germany, the Neanderthals from Scladina, Neanderthals from France and Croatia, over about 100,000 years. And in every case, in all these different environments, the Neanderthals do the same thing.

NARRATOR: So the bones of the boy from Scladina and his people are revealing important clues to Neanderthal behavior. They did one thing: hunting large game. And they just kept on doing it for hundreds of thousands of years. Their technology tells a similar story.

JOHN SHEA (Stony Brook University): Neanderthal technology is quick and dirty. It's simple. There's very few tools that Neanderthals made that one can't copy in a few seconds, or even minutes.

NARRATOR: Although they hunted large animals, they didn't have throwing spears or arrows.

JOHN SHEA: None of the stone tools that the Neanderthals made are the size and shape sufficient to be a projectile point. They're all too big, which suggests they're either knives or tips of thrusting spears.

NARRATOR: That meant Neanderthal hunters had to get close to their prey to kill them, which made hunting a risky business. Most Neanderthal male skeletons have multiple fractures. Neanderthal lives were tough, and they were short. Their skeletons tell us that very few lived beyond the age of 30.

But as a species, the Neanderthals were long-lived. They lasted for almost 400,000 years. That's twice as long as we have.

But one day, their time on Earth would come to an end. By 25,000 years ago, they vanish from the fossil record. So what happened?

To find out, we have to return to Africa: the Great Rift Valley, the stage on which so much of human evolution has played out. It was here, millions of years ago that nature began its grand experiment with creatures like Lucy, who walked upright. It was here, just over a million years ago, that Turkana Boy and his kind, with their bigger brains and bodies, formed the first hunter-gatherer societies.

And it was here, about 200,000 years ago that the skulls of a new species start to be found, the last human to evolve, Homo sapiens.

They are still not completely us. Their brow ridges are a little heavier, their faces a little bigger, and their technology is still simple.

JOHN SHEA: You have stone tools made by Neanderthals, and stone tools made by Homo sapiens, and they're identical. You can't tell which one made the stone tools, because they were making the same kinds of tools.

NARRATOR: So what changed? What made us into the versatile beings we are today? All the evidence points to climate upheaval.

CURTIS MAREAN: We enter one of the longest, coldest glacial stages on record.

NARRATOR: Around 200,000 years ago, vast ice sheets descend. In Africa, megadroughts turn much of the continent into a desert.

SPENCER WELLS (National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence): And so, basically, you've got this double whammy of climatic challenges slamming the African population, and the people dwindle.

NARRATOR: Geneticist Spencer Wells believes that ancient population crashes have left a footprint in our genes. It's called the bottleneck effect.

SPENCER WELLS: Humans, although on the surface we seem to be so different from each other, actually have remarkably little genetic diversity. We're 99.9 percent identical. Look at other apes, like chimps or gorillas or orangutans, they have between four and ten times as much diversity at the D.N.A. level.

NARRATOR: The lack of diversity in human D.N.A. is a clue to a crisis that may have wiped out whole populations.

SPENCER WELLS: The reason that we have so little diversity at the genetic level is because we lost it at some point. Imagine that this bottle of jellybeans is the initial population; you've got so much diversity in here. What happens during a bottleneck? When you go through the bottleneck, only a few of the lineages survive. So that's the drop in population size right there.

Everyone alive today is a descendent of these individuals. And you can see that we're missing many of the colors that you see in the initial population. That's how a bottleneck works. And everybody alive today is a descendent of that small number of individuals who made it through the bottleneck.

NARRATOR: Ancient climate data shows that around 140,000 years ago most of tropical Africa became uninhabitable. Our ancestors were forced to seek refuge on coasts and highlands.

CURTIS MAREAN: It looks like four to six potential locations in Africa that would still be supportive of hunter-gatherer populations.

NARRATOR: Despite the refuges, there is evidence our ancestors were pushed to the brink of extinction.

CURTIS MAREAN: The genetic record shows us that we are all descended from a small population of approximately 600 breeding individuals.

NARRATOR: There's disagreement about the numbers and timing, but it does seem that all people on Earth are descended from a very small original population in Africa. Curtis Marean believes they lived on the South African coastline, and that it was life by the sea that forced them to change.

At Pinnacle Point, South Africa, he has found caves used by early Homo sapiens' ancestors during the megadrought period. They are full of clues that hint at new ways of thinking and behaving. Here he has found some of the earliest evidence that humans were living off the sea.

CURTIS MAREAN: This darkish material here is ash from a fireplace, and the vast majority of this material is burnt shell. So, clearly, there is quite a bit of cooking of shellfish that was taking place at this exact spot. Seventy-six thousand years ago somebody had a nice shellfish dinner there.

NARRATOR: Here was a population that was broadening its diet away from meat, requiring ingenuity unknown among earlier ancestors.

CURTIS MAREAN: If you go out to collect shellfish at the wrong time, you're dead. You have to be able to time your access to the coastline so that you're here when the tides are right to collect those shellfish.

NARRATOR: The best time to collect shellfish is at extreme low tides, and to predict those it helps to understand the cycles of the moon.

CURTIS MAREAN: Those are the times that you want to be collecting shellfish, all the shellfish are exposed so this water, which you see here, is out there at that point, where that rock is. So the smart coastal hunter-gatherer knows how to use the moon to signal to them when to come to the coastline to collect the shellfish.

NARRATOR: The people of Pinnacle Point were not just harvesting shellfish. They were also hunting on the plains behind the coast and gathering berries and roots. Their way of life reflected a new versatility.

CURTIS MAREAN: The systematic use of coastal resources does suggest a cognitive complexity.

NARRATOR: Our ancestors occupied these caves for over 140,000 years, leaving behind an amazing record of their transformation.

CURTIS MAREAN: This site documents a change in the way that people made stone tools. At the bottom of the sequence, they made stone tools with this rough quartzite material. And then, right at about 71,000 years ago—which occurs just about there in the sequence—they make a shift to making stone tools on this silcrete, in the form of long thin blades.

Before flaking it, the people here were heating this material in the fire and, through heating it, improved its flakeability. And that was at about 71,000 years ago, about 40,000 years older than that has been found anywhere else in the world.

NARRATOR: The technology of our ancestors was expanding from the single all-purpose hand ax to a variety of lighter specialized tools.

JOHN SHEA: Then they starting making these kinds of things, they made tools with special little points for perforating tasks: this. They made others with special chiseled ends for carving tasks.

NARRATOR: Specialized tools allowed our ancestors to get more out of their environment, but this wasn't the only change.

JOHN SHEA: And, at this point, we begin to see people treating stone tools as symbols. They're making them more complex than they need to be to accomplish a particular cutting task. So, at this point, stone tools are no longer just tools for cutting things, they're instruments of carrying social information about their owners.

NARRATOR: A new type of symbolic consciousness was emerging. The first evidence of decorative art, made from a naturally occurring mineral called red ochre, has been found at Blombos, another cave along the South African coast.

CHRISTOPHER HENSHILWOOD (University of Bergen): While we were excavating, more or less in this area you can see over here, we found a chunk of ochre. And when we brushed up the surface of the ochre, we realized there was actually a design on the one side. And once we looked at it in more detail, held it up to the light, we could see a cross-hatched pattern that had lines zigzagged across the surface of this flat ground surface and also had lines across the top, through the middle, and along the bottom. And you can imagine, it was enormous excitement, because we did not expect to find something that might represent a symbolic image in these 75,000 year-old levels. So this really was an enormous, enormous surprise for us.

NARRATOR: At Blombos, they've also found shells with holes drilled in them, believed to have been used for necklaces. So our ancestors were now wearing ornaments and probably painting their bodies, as well.

CHRISTOPHER HENSHILWOOD: For me, what is really important is here, for the first time, really, ever, we have evidence that people can store information outside of the human brain.

NARRATOR: It is the birth of a new type of human culture, more complex but easier to pass on from generation to generation.

Sixty-thousand years ago, our ancestors emerged with new technology and new culture. Thousands of years of drought had forced them to change. They were ready to explore the world.

As the climate improved, they started to stream out of Africa. They might have been surprised to discover continents already populated by other humans, remnants of earlier, more primitive migrations. As they moved into Asia, they might have come across Homo erectus or the tiny Hobbit.

There's no evidence for such a meeting. But there is one encounter we can be more certain about. As a separate wave slowly moved through the Middle East into Europe, they must have met the Neanderthals.

What were those meetings like?

For many years scientists speculated that early Homo sapiens populations absorbed the Neanderthals through interbreeding. If they did, there would be traces of Neanderthal D.N.A. in our genes today. But there was no way to detect Neanderthal D.N.A., until researchers at the Max Planck Institute set out on a daring scientific odyssey: the quest to sequence the Neanderthal genome.

The human genome contains approximately three billion chemical bases: the As, Ts, Cs and Gs that make up our genes. Mapping that was hard enough. The idea of mapping the genome of a long extinct species, seemed pure fantasy. But that didn't stop Svante Pääbo from dreaming about it.

The first problem was to get D.N.A. from Neanderthal bones over 30,000 years old. In most cases, D.N.A. degrades steadily over time, leaving only minute fragments.

SVANTE PÄÄBO (Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology): My group is involved, since over 20 years now, in developing techniques to retrieve ancient D.N.A. from fossils and old bones. And of course always a dream was to do the Neanderthal, our closest relative.

NARRATOR: But finally, taking great care not to contaminate it with their own, they isolated the first piece of Neanderthal D.N.A. Svante's dream is now a reality. He and his team have made a draft of the entire Neanderthal genome. Now scientists all over the world can compare key parts of it to the human genome. And one such comparison is already giving us deeper insight into the Neanderthal brain: the gene called FOXP2.

SVANTE PÄÄBO: It's the only gene we know of today that's involved in speech and language development in humans. We know that because, if one copy is lost in a human due to mutation, we have a severe speech problem.

NARRATOR: When first discovered, FOXP2 created a lot of excitement. Although many animals have the FOXP2 gene, the human version is unique. Some thought it was the gene for language. We now know that complex traits like language are controlled by many genes. Yet researchers agree the human version of FOXP2 is closely tied to some of the basic motor skills necessary for speech.

SVANTE PÄÄBO: And a big question was, of course, is that shared with Neanderthals or not? And when we now look at it in the Neanderthal, indeed it looks to be identical with us.

NARRATOR: It's tantalizing evidence that despite their mental limitations, the boy from Scladina and his people may have been able to speak.

If we share the capacity for language with the Neanderthals, could we both have inherited it from the same source, a common ancestor who gave rise to both species? Who was it?

With a technique called the molecular clock, scientists can now find out. That's because D.N.A. mutates, or changes, at a surprisingly regular rate. By counting the differences in the genetic code of Neanderthal and ourselves, simply comparing the As, Ts, Cs and Gs in our D.N.A., scientists can calculate how long the two species have been diverging.

SVANTE PÄÄBO: We can then estimate when there was a common ancestor population, where some individuals went on to become modern humans, some went on to become Neanderthals. It's in the order of say 300,000 to 400,000 years ago.

NARRATOR: The timing points straight to the intriguing ancestors who left Africa half a million years ago, and buried their dead in the hills of northern Spain, leaving a distinctive pink hand ax at the spot.

This is Homo heidelbergensis, who we now know is our ancestor, too. In Europe, they evolved into the Neanderthal. In Africa, groups that had not yet migrated evolved into Homo sapiens.

So D.N.A. is revealing we share a common ancestor with the Neanderthals. But do we carry some vestige of Neanderthal D.N.A. in our genes, proof that we absorbed them by interbreeding?

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: Some people claim that there are some hybrids of Neanderthals and modern humans. In the genetical record, we don't see clear evidence of that. The big story is that there were Neanderthals that were replaced by other people, and, after a rather short time, we don't see any trace of the Neanderthals in Europe. And certainly, today, we don't see, really, traces of Neanderthal genes.

NARRATOR: With no evidence of interbreeding, it now seems more likely that as our population grew, we simply pushed the Neanderthals out of their environments.

DANIEL LIEBERMAN: Humans have a very intensive way of using the environment. We seem to have the ability to pump out lots of babies, and our babies seem to have a high probability of surviving. So population growth is a really important part of the human adaptation.

NARRATOR: The arrival of Homo sapiens was not the only thing the Neanderthals had to contend with. Europe was gripped by wild climate swings. The Neanderthals were already struggling to survive.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: Probably the density of Neanderthals in the landscape was very low.

NARRATOR: And there was a good reason for that. Neanderthal technology was limited, and their energy needs were huge.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: They had these big bodies, these big brains, living in rather cold environments, so we have estimates of their energy consumption every day. It's about 5,000 kilocalories. It's about what someone racing the Tour de France is spending every day.

NARRATOR: But with slimmer, taller bodies, modern humans had lower energy demands and an ever-improving toolkit. They now developed yet another breakthrough technology: projectile weapons, throwing spears.

JOHN SHEA: These are two very different kinds of spears. These are the big heavy wooden spears that Neanderthals and their ancestors used. These are the lighter bone-tipped spears that Homo sapiens used.

These weapons have different kinds of performance characteristics. The heavy spears are effective at a very short range, and they're heavy; you can only carry so many of them in one hand. The bone-tipped spears are lighter, they're more durable, they have a longer effective range.

In essence, the bone-tipped spears that our ancestors used allowed them to hunt a wider range of animals more safely and, therefore, to have a broader ecological niche.

These big, heavy spears, with their weight, their relatively short range, it's like hunting with a pistol. Whereas using these things is like using a semi-automatic rifle: one has more than one shot, one has greater range; it's a more effective weapon.

NARRATOR: Throwing spears allowed our ancestors to go after a wider range of game with less risk to themselves.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: The modern humans have this trend of intensifying their exploitation of the environment to, sort of, squeezing out everything possible from the environment.

NARRATOR: That trend, already established in Africa, would become more pronounced as our ancestors spread around the world.

Archeologists have been able to track their movements by the extinctions of large animals. In Europe and Asia, the arrival of Homo sapiens coincides with the disappearance of the hairy mammoth, the cave lion and other large mammals. In Australia, most animals weighing over 100 pounds vanish within a few thousand years of our arrival.

JOHN SHEA: The effects of Homo sapiens on large animal communities become more profound as you move further and further from Africa. So, very few major extinctions in Africa, a few of them; a few extinctions associated with Homo sapiens moving into Eurasia; and then, when they hit Australia and the New World, it's a wipeout.

NARRATOR: The Neanderthals were just one of many species that disappeared when we arrived. Gradually, they were pushed into marginal areas of Europe. Their last refuge seems to have been the Rock of Gibraltar, 28,000 years go. Then they vanished, leaving no legacy but their fossilized bones. For the first time there was only one type of human on the planet.

JEAN-JACQUES HUBLIN: But this species, it covered the whole planet, it went to places where other hominids lived, led them to extinction, actually. They went to Australia, they went to America, they went to the moon, and they will go to Mars. And this is very peculiar because the way this species intensified its exploitation of the environment is really unique.

NARRATOR: In the beginning, climate upheavals made us what we are. They taught us a new inventiveness which has led to a cascade of technological advances.

But exactly what made us different is still an enigma. Soon we'll discover the genetic changes unique to our species. But genes are only part of what makes us special. The other part is that mysterious creation unique to humans: culture.

DONALD JOHANSON: Homo sapiens is the most adaptable species in the human career, meaning that no matter what happens in the world, we have a way of adapting to it. Today, that way is called "culture." If glaciers came to Arizona where I live, we wouldn't be growing thick fur and thick skin, we would be building more fireplaces and heating systems.

NARRATOR: Culture is the storehouse of our complex ways of thinking and perceiving, and we pass it on to our children as surely as we pass on our genes. The ways in which cultural evolution and genetic evolution interact will be at the forefront of the research of tomorrow, because one thing is for sure, evolution is not stopping.

SPENCER WELLS: The rate of evolution at the genomic level has increased over the last 10,000 years, and it will probably continue over the next few thousand years.

NARRATOR: Where it will take us, nobody knows, but we're still a young species. There is a long future ahead.

Watch Online -

Monday, January 18, 2010

Birth of Humanity

The questions are huge. But now there are answers.

At the threshold of humanity, one ancestor contains tantalizing secrets. It is known as Homo erectus.

RICHARD WRANGHAM (Harvard University): Homo erectus had a slightly smaller brain, slightly bigger jaw, but it's basically us.

NARRATOR: Basically us, almost 2,000,000 years ago.

New finds are revealing the truth about the ancestors at the heart of our evolution. Here were the trailblazers who first left Africa: the first fire makers, the first hunters.

JOHN SHEA (Stony Brook University): These creatures were capable of analyzing possible uses of tools and coming up with a technological solution to the problem: how do you kill a big, dangerous animal without getting killed yourself.

NARRATOR: Homo erectus pioneered what it means to be human, colonizing whole continents and creating the first human societies.

SARAH BLAFFER HRDY (University of California, Davis): Our ancestors began to care about what others thought and care about what that individual thought about them.

NARRATOR: Now, new discoveries are bringing them alive as never before. At last we come face to face with the ancestors at the birth of humanity, right now on NOVA.

Major funding for NOVA is provided by the following:

I've been growing algae for 35 years. Most people try to get rid of algae; we're trying to grow it. The algae are very beautiful. They come in blue and red, golden, green. Algae could be converted into biofuels that we could someday run our cars on. In using algae to form biofuels, we're not competing with the food supply, and they absorb CO2, so they help solve the greenhouse problem as well. We're making a big commitment to finding out just how much algae can help to meet the fuel demands of the world.

To pursue the life you want, sometimes you need a financial advocate who knows where you want to go. A Merrill Lynch financial advisor, now with access to the resources of Bank of America, can help you diversify, rebalance, imagine, and believe: Merrill Lynch Wealth Management.

And by Pacific Life: the power to help you succeed; offering insurance, annuities, and investments.

And David H. Koch. And...

Discover new knowledge: HHMI.

And by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and viewers like you. Thank you.

NARRATOR: The Great Rift Valley of East Africa. Two million years ago, these spectacular plains and canyons witnessed a mysterious event: the birth of the first ancestor we can really call human.

New discoveries are revealing a creature surprisingly like us, a world traveler, a toolmaker, a hunter, tamer of fire, creator of the first human societies.

Amazingly, the qualities that make us human began not with our own species, Homo sapiens; the true birth of humanity began much further back in time, millions of years ago.

Imagine the entire span of recorded human history, taking us back to the Egyptian pyramids, about 5,000 years. Double it: 10,000 years ago, when plants were domesticated and agriculture begins. Double it again, 20,000 years: Ice Age hunters are painting stunning images on cave walls. And keep doubling six more times: only then do we encounter our ancestor, Homo erectus, in Africa's Great Rift Valley.

For millions of years, this massive geological fault line running the length of East Africa was a stage on which our human evolution was played out.

It all started with the first apes to walk upright on two legs, about 6,000,000 years ago. There were many different types, all variations on the same theme: ape-like creatures with small brains.

The fossil known as Lucy is the most famous example. Here she is: just three-foot, eight-inches tall, with a brain the size of a chimp's.

For millions of years, creatures like her roamed the forests and grasslands of Africa. But then something changed. About 2,000,000 years ago, new creatures appeared with abilities never seen before in the animal kingdom. Meet Homo erectus, a toolmaker and hunter, one of the first members of our genus, the genus Homo, humans.

DANIEL LIEBERMAN (Harvard University): The transition to Homo was probably one of the most important transformations that occurred in human evolution.

NARRATOR: Arms got thinner, legs got longer, brains got bigger. It was a huge evolutionary step from ape bodies to bodies like ours. But what about the things that make us distinctly human? Creativity, intelligence, caring for each other; how can we know when these got started?

With only skulls and bone fragments to go on, how could we ever know what those first humans were really like? It would take a momentous find to shed light on their lives.

Lake Turkana, Northern Kenya: surrounded by volcanoes and vast expanses of baking desert.

In 1984, famed anthropologists Richard and Meave Leakey were working at this remote inland sea.

MEAVE LEAKEY (National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence): I was actually on the east side of the lake. And then Richard flew over and said, "You've got to come. There's something really exciting."

NARRATOR: As the first family of paleoanthropology, the Leakeys were used to fossil finds. But this was very special. One of Leakey's team had found a skull fragment of one of those early humans. He could tell from its size and shape it was Homo erectus. And there was more than just a fragment.

RICHARD LEAKEY (National Geographic Grantee): So we started looking at the site on a more extensive basis. And of course once we did, we found the rest of the skull.

NARRATOR: A complete skull was rare enough, but it was just the beginning. Soon parts of the Homo erectus skeleton which had never been found before, started to emerge.

MEAVE LEAKEY: We couldn't believe it, but we started getting pieces of ribs. These were the parts of Homo erectus that nobody actually knew about, nobody had ever seen before. So every bone that came out of the ground was something brand new to science. And we were looking at these things, and it was really amazing.

NARRATOR: And here they are: the actual bones of a human ancestor who lived over one and a half million years ago. It's the earliest human skeleton ever discovered.

The Leakeys called him "Turkana Boy." His bones have revolutionized our understanding of the transition from ape to human.

SUSAN ANTÓN (New York University): The really important thing about Turkana Boy is how complete he is. We've got arms and legs, and bits of his spine and his ribs. And usually when we find these things, we get very excited about one little bit of bone, but that little bit can't tell us very much about an individual. So having a nearly complete skeleton, we can start to ask big questions.

NARRATOR: The first big question was, "What did he look like?"

His skeleton tells us he was five-feet, three-inches tall with a build closer to a man's than an ape's. But how close?

Paleoartist Viktor Deak specializes in painting and sculpting our human ancestors with precise anatomical accuracy.

Viktor is going to add Turkana Boy to his family of ancient faces.

VIKTOR DEAK (Paleoartist): At this stage of the game, I know that Turkana Boy is not an ape. He is a very early, true human. And so, here, we have a modern human skull. The faces are very similar to one another, but Turkana Boy's skull is a bit more primitive and has a lower forehead and a much smaller brain capacity.

NARRATOR: Viktor will build Turkana Boy's face, muscle by muscle, based on his studies of cadavers and modern anatomy.

While his head may be primitive, Turkana Boy's skeleton is surprisingly human. His hips are a little wider, his arms a little longer, but his overall body shape is just like ours.

VIKTOR DEAK: Turkana Boy and erectus, that's something that if you were to see from a hundred feet away, you would think, "Well there's a large naked man there, or woman, or...," you know? But it's a human.

NARRATOR: It will take Viktor a week to flesh out Turkana Boy's face. Meanwhile, a team of animators is at work creating scenes that will bring Turkana Boy and his people to life. To make sure they do it accurately, they have enlisted the help of Harvard anthropologist Dan Lieberman.

DANIEL LIEBERMAN: They had a more forward position of the palms when they ran, just slightly. There you go.

NARRATOR: The blue suited actors are there to create movement references for the artists.

In the final animations, they will be replaced by Homo erectus bodies...

GRAHAM TOWNSLEY (Director): And...action!

NARRATOR: ...their heads and faces based closely on Viktor's model.

As Turkana Boy's forensically reconstructed head nears completion, a face emerges that looks a lot like us. Now, for the first time in a million and half years, here he is, our ancestor, the Homo erectus called Turkana Boy.

But what he looked like is only the beginning of his story. To reconstruct his life, we need to find out how old he was.

SUSAN ANTÓN: And if we look at his skeleton, we can see that the growth plates on his limbs that would fuse when he's fully adult are all unfused, so even though he's very tall, we know that he's still growing.

NARRATOR: The fact that Turkana Boy was not fully grown has turned out to be a boon to researchers.

MEAVE LEAKEY: You can answer questions like did the boy grow up like a modern human? Or did he grow up more like an ape?

NARRATOR: Turkana Boy was already five-feet, three-inches tall.

When scientists compared his bones and teeth to ours, he seemed to be about 14 years old. But when dental specialist Chris Dean began to study his teeth he was in for a shock. It turns out that all teeth, fossil or not, preserve a remarkably precise record of childhood.

CHRISTOPHER DEAN (University College London): This is a fossil tooth, and we can see the enamel cap which covers the core of the tooth, which is made of dentine. Dentine is just another word for ivory. Within the enamel you can see the rods, which are running from the enamel dentine junction, here, out to the surface of the tooth.

NARRATOR: Enamel has a regular growth pattern, like the rings of a tree. Under an electron microscope it looks like rods made of tiny beads.

CHRIS DEAN: Each of the little beads, along these prisms represent one day's growth because the cells which produce enamel are actually under the influence of a circadian, or daily clock. And those secretions during the day speed up and then slow down, and there's a permanent record of that in every tooth.

So you can see rods running all the way through this tissue and every day along the rod there is a wobble where the tissue slows down and then speeds up.

NARRATOR: So if you count the beads in these strings, you can figure out exactly how many days that tooth has been growing.

When Chris looked at the fossilized teeth of Turkana Boy, he got a huge surprise. Turkana Boy wasn't fourteen years old. He was eight.

CHRIS DEAN: What that implies is that the growth of the Turkana Boy resembled more closely that of chimpanzees today.

NARRATOR: To be five-foot-three at age eight, Turkana Boy must have grown up very fast, at a rate closer to chimps than us.

A chimpanzee's childhood is short. It is sexually mature at about seven. Human childhood is longer. We reach puberty at about 12.

So as humans evolved from apes, childhood was extended. But what advantage could be gained by having helpless children around to feed and care for, who take so long to grow up?

The mystery of prolonged childhood is at the heart of human evolution. It may be related to brain size. We humans have the biggest brains in the animal kingdom in relation to our body size. They are so big that most of our brain growth has to happen outside the womb or our heads would never get through the birth canal.

A long, slow childhood gives our brains time to grow after birth and time to learn everything we need to function in our complex human societies. That's the advantage of prolonged childhood, for us at least.

But what about Turkana Boy?

His brain was 900 cubic centimeters, smaller than ours but more than twice as large a chimp's. So was he on the way to thinking and talking like us?

Ralph Holloway believes he was. He's been collecting the brain endocasts of human ancestors for over 30 years.

An endocast is a mold taken from the inside of the skull which reveals the shape of the brain. Ralph is particularly interested in something called the Broca's area.

RALPH HOLLOWAY (Columbia University): Broca's area is involved with memory functions, executive functions, but it does have a very important role to play in the motor aspects of speech.

NARRATOR: In the brain of Turkana Boy, Ralph believes he sees evidence for something remarkable, a change in the Broca's area, tied to communication.

RALPH HOLLOWAY: Broca's caps regions on the Turkana Boy are fully modern in terms of their appearance. It is good solid evidence for the...having the ability of symbolic communication, in other words, language.

NARRATOR: It's a controversial idea, and we'll never know for sure if Turkana Boy could speak. But there are other clues to his intelligence: the stone tools he left behind.

JOHN SHEA: Homo erectus made tools like this hand ax here. It's been chipped extensively on both sides. The point enables one to do piercing tasks; the heavy bit here can be used for cracking bone or chopping wood. It's a very, very versatile tool, and a sharp one.

NARRATOR: It may not look like much, but the stone hand ax marks the birth of technology.

Homo erectus has left us many signs of his inventiveness. Here in Central Kenya, Rick Potts has been studying a treasure trove of Homo erectus stone tools.

RICK POTTS (Smithsonian Institution): Stone tools represented a momentous change, because once you had tools in your hands, all the foods in the world could open up to you. That represented a tremendous survival advantage.

NARRATOR: Here is a cache of over 500 stone hand axes made by Homo erectus. Just a mile away, Rick visits the quarry where, for thousands of years, these ancestors came to shape stone into tools, leaving behind unused fragments.

RICK POTTS: In the crevices at my feet, there were thousands of fragments of stone from tool-making. And there are several scars where Homo erectus struck huge flakes. We also see evidence that they could recognize flaws. They could see which ones would break if they took them away, so they simply discarded them here. What's amazing about that is you could imagine an early Homo erectus sitting right here, making decisions.

NARRATOR: The kind of decision-making it takes to create a stone tool has been researched extensively by John Shea.

JOHN SHEA: I'm just going to tap it a little bit. I'm just checking it out to see if there's any internal flaws before I do it. There may be one here. It feels like there might be something in there, but I like a challenge so I'll knap it anyway.

NARRATOR: Even for an expert, making a hand ax is not easy.

JOHN SHEA: Yeah, there's the flaw, but we got around it.

NARRATOR: A good toolmaker has to understand the properties of stone.

JOHN SHEA: To make this thing nice and thin, easier to carry, easier to transport and more of a sharp cutting edge, I'm going to do something kind of counter-intuitive. I'm going to dull the edge so that the next time I strike it, it won't fail until I have a lot of pressure on it. So if I hit it really hard, the fracture will go much further than it otherwise would.

So, that Homo erectus did this tells us they were capable of thinking ahead and planning the consequences of their actions. So, let's have a look here. What'll happen here?

NARRATOR: Many of these stones have hidden defects. Failing to spot them could spell disaster.

JOHN SHEA: There's still a flaw in there, I can hear it. I can tell. Yeah, see this? It's right there. Now, I've worked around it, but if I were an early human that spotted this, I would stop making the hand ax right now. If I'm out running around in the savannas, chasing a rhinoceros and, you know, or butchering a rhinoceros as the lions are circling, and my hand ax breaks, I'm in trouble.

So, you know, I go home tonight, I'm still going to get fed, even though I didn't make a perfect hand ax. As Homo erectus, I might end up being the meal instead.

NARRATOR: A skilled craftsman, Homo erectus had evolved a new type of intelligence. But his bigger brain came with hidden costs.

Modern brains consume 25 percent of our body's energy.

DONALD JOHANSON (Institute of Human Origins): Our brain happens to be the hungriest organ in the body. And in order to support a brain our size, we need lots of calories.

NARRATOR: With his big brain and body, a Homo erectus like Turkana Boy needed more nutrition from his savanna environment.

JOHN SHEA: Turkana Boy, had he grown to adulthood, would probably have stood about six feet tall. This is a big, strong creature that would have had a huge energy budget. One can satisfy an energy budget like that by eating plants, but you have to eat a lot, a lot of plants.

NARRATOR: But there's one food that can supply the nutrients a growing brain and body need. And Africa was filled with it!

DANIEL LIEBERMAN: The one high quality resource that's probably most important for the evolution of the genus Homo is meat and meat byproducts, such as brain and marrow and fat. They're high in protein, they're high in calories, and they're easy to digest. But the one problem with getting meat is that it's hard to get.

NARRATOR: Most predators rely on strength or speed to kill their prey. Our ancestors had neither. Today we are on top of the food chain, so it's hard to imagine the predicament of those early humans. Here was a slow moving creature with no claws or fangs, easy prey for the hungry predators around him.

RICK POTTS: This is a fossil forehead and brow ridge of a Homo erectus, and on the brow ridge you can see the bite mark of a carnivore. Well this reminds us that these Homo erectus individuals weren't at the top of the food chain.

NARRATOR: So how did Turkana Boy—a weakling with a big brain which needed calories—get his meat?

JOHN SHEA: Homo erectus faced a problem: how do you kill a big, dangerous animal that has lots of meat and fat in it, without that animal also killing you?

DANIEL LIEBERMAN: I think the answer to that was a very clever set of innovations, and that is endurance running and high activity in the middle of the day.

NARRATOR: The ancestors of Homo erectus, small, hairy apes like Lucy, were bipedal but probably didn't do much running. But Turkana Boy's kind were built to run, like us.

Dan Lieberman believes they could run long distances because, like us, they had lost their thick coat of body hair, and could keep cool by sweating. This was the key to their success.

But how do we know if these crucial changes go back all the way to Turkana Boy's time, over a million years ago? Skin and hair are rarely preserved in the fossil record, so to find out, we have to look to a creature that's been intimately connected with hair for a long time: the louse.

MARK STONEKING (Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology): All animals seem to have some type of lice to parasitize them: mammals have them, birds have them, even fish have types of lice, but most other creatures have only one type of lice that parasitized them.

NARRATOR: Humans have one kind of louse on their heads and another in the pubic area. Geneticist Mark Stoneking asked himself why.

MARK STONEKING: The answer that seems obvious is that when we had body hair all over our bodies, we had one type of lice. But then we became hairless until we only had hair on our heads and in our pubic region, and so, therefore, you would have this sort of hairless geographic barrier to contact between the two.

NARRATOR: Mark was surprised to find out that the human pubic louse is very different from the human head louse. Somehow, in the past, it seems to have come from gorillas.

MARK STONEKING: ...because the pubic lice are more closely related to gorilla lice. Now, how it is our ancestors got pubic lice from gorillas, I wouldn't care to speculate. But nonetheless, one needs gorilla lice in order to really work this whole thing out.

NARRATOR: The most likely scenario is that when we lost our body hair, the original human louse migrated to our heads, leaving the pubic area temporarily unpopulated by lice. When our ancestors had contact with gorillas, perhaps sleeping in their nests or scavenging their bodies for meat, the gorilla louse colonized their pubic region. Eventually it turned into the human pubic louse of today.

So if we could find out when the human pubic louse and the gorilla louse diverged we would have a rough idea of when we lost our body hair. Fortunately, there's a way to figure that out: the genetic dating technique known as the molecular clock. It's based on the fact that the sequence of chemical bases which make up D.N.A. mutate at a regular rate.

MARK STONEKING: It's just a very simple idea that the rate of change in D.N.A. sequences is more or less constant over time. And that means that you have a way of determining when two species last shared a common ancestor.

NARRATOR: By counting the number of differences in the genetic code of two species, scientists can determine how long they've been evolving away from each other. When Mark used the molecular clock to count the differences between the D.N.A. of gorilla lice and human pubic lice, he came up with a date for their divergence.

MARK STONEKING: The estimated date for the divergence is roughly 3,000,000 years ago.

NARRATOR: That means long before Turkana Boy, maybe even around Lucy's time, our ancestors had slowly begun to lose their body hair. Turkana Boy was mostly hairless, just like us, and that may be what gave him an edge over other predators.

Most animals are at a disadvantage in the midday sun because they overheat. They can only cool down by panting. And when they run fast they can't pant. That means they can only run in short sprints.

DANIEL LIEBERMAN: Quadrupeds can gallop for about ten to fifteen minutes and then they overheat. But hominids can cool down by sweating. They use their entire body like a dog's tongue.

NARRATOR: Our hairless bodies allow air to circulate freely on our skin and cool us down as sweat evaporates. This makes us one of the best long-distance runners in the animal kingdom.

Dan Lieberman believes this gave our ancestors the ability to hunt in a very unusual way. It's called persistence hunting. And he believes the modern ethnographic record can show us how it was done.

The Bushmen of the Kalahari offer us an insight into how Homo erectus might have hunted 2,000,000 years ago.

The Bushmen know that at midday animals rest in the shade, which is why it's the perfect time to be hunting.

Once they locate their prey—in this case a kudu—the marathon begins. Their strategy is simple: run it to exhaustion. Every time the animal tries to rest, the hunters track it down and get it moving again. They never give it a chance to cool down. And the reason they can keep going is that they can sweat.

So if the theory is right, the Bushmen hunt may help explain how Turkana Boy got his meat. Homo erectus had come up with an innovative way of feeding his hungry brain.

In this modern hunt, the Bushmen ran in the fierce heat for over four hours. The kudu was finally immobilized by heat stroke.

Turkana Boy wouldn't have had steel-tipped spears like the Bushmen, but he wouldn't have needed them.

JOHN SHEA: Homo erectus probably hunted with close-quarters weapons, with spears that were thrown at animals from a short distance, clubs, thrown rocks, weapons like that. They weren't using long distance projectile weapons that we know of.

NARRATOR: The Homo erectus hunt was simple but effective. It fed not just their larger brains, but the growing complexity of that early human society.

There are other social animals, but none quite like us. Society is in every corner of our lives, our relationships, communication, rules, symbolism, all the things that bind us together. What's behind it? Why did we become so social? Could it have something to do with another innovation, something unprecedented in our evolution: building fires and cooking?

RICHARD WRANGHAM: Here we go to erectus, the first species that looks like us, and I think only cooking can explain the magnitude of this change.

NARRATOR: The earliest evidence that our ancestors deliberately used fire for cooking dates to long after Turkana Boy's time. But Richard Wrangham is sure Homo erectus was building fires much earlier.

RICHARD WRANGHAM: Now, for the first time, we had a species that was committed to living on the ground because they lose their climbing adaptations. Well how were they sleeping?

They had to be able to protect themselves from wild animals.

NARRATOR: On the African savanna, full of predators who hunt by night, Richard believes Turkana Boy and his people couldn't have survived without fire. And he thinks only cooking, which makes food more soft and digestible can explain why Homo erectus evolved smaller teeth and a much smaller gut.

RICHARD WRANGHAM: These things are compatible with the reduced cost of digestion, produced by cooking food. Nothing else is.

NARRATOR: As our ancestors reaped the benefits of cooking, something else happened too, at least according to Wrangham: we became more social.

RICHARD WRANGHAM: Humans have this wonderfully calm temperament compared to chimpanzees, say. Where did it come from? We were drawn to a common place, the fireplace.

NARRATOR: Wrangham believes we learned to share and communicate sitting around fires, waiting for food to cook.

It's speculative, but one thing is for sure: in the Homo erectus world, new social relationships had to be evolving.

The bonds between mothers and children must've been very different from the apes.

SARAH BLAFFER HRDY: For example, a mother orangutan will not allow any other individual to take her infant, will be in constant skin-to-skin contact with that baby for at least the first six months of life, not a moment out of contact.

NARRATOR: Secure in this unbreakable mother-infant bond, ape babies need less capacity to read the intentions of others than human babies, whose bond with their mothers is surprisingly less secure. The shocking fact is that human mothers abandon their infants much more often than ape mothers. Infanticide by a mother is more common among humans than any other higher ape.

SARAH BLAFFER HRDY: Maternal commitment is a lot more contingent in humans than it seems to be in other apes.

NARRATOR: Unlike most primates, human mothers share parenting with others. A child's survival can depend on making itself appealing to a number of caregivers. Perhaps that's why human infants have evolved a uniquely acute sensitivity.

SARAH BLAFFER HRDY: Human infants are born connoisseurs of mothers, reading her facial expression, looking for signs of commitment.

NARRATOR: We are born hard-wired with an awareness of the intentions and emotions of others, which is unique in the animal world.

SARAH BLAFFER HRDY: When did humans develop this gift for attributing mental states and feelings to others and for caring about what others thought about them?

NARRATOR: Could these social instincts have developed with Homo erectus? Along with cooperative hunting, bigger brains, longer childhoods and the use of fire? Perhaps Turkana Boy and his people already had social skills that would be familiar to us. Here were intelligent social beings with an increasing capacity for cooperation.

It may be this that made possible another great achievement, the exodus from Africa. For millions of years, our earliest ancestors stayed on the African savannas, but at some point they started to leave.

Ancient fossil skulls and tools have been found as far away as China and Indonesia. The question is: when did they leave Africa and why?

When Turkana Boy was found, scientists thought they had the answer. Here was a strong, large-brained ancestor, capable of an arduous migration. He had the look of a world conqueror.

SUSAN ANTÓN: In the mid-1980s we were thinking that a hominid like this one had left Africa, but had done it maybe about a million years ago.

NARRATOR: For decades, scientists believed big, strapping humans, like Turkana Boy, left Africa a million years ago. But new discoveries are showing the migration may have started a lot earlier than that.

Dmanisi, Georgia: the mountains and plains of the Caucasus, thousands of miles from the Great Rift Valley, had never produced any fossils of early human ancestors, but then an astonishing discovery was made.

ABESALOM VEKUA (Georgian National Museum): It was a lower jaw, with teeth downward, this way, in the ground. So, when I started to clean, those front teeth came to light, it became obvious to me that we had found some kind of hominid.

But what kind? The jaw seemed to be a primitive form of Homo erectus, but at first hardly anyone believed it.

DAVID LORDKIPANIDZE (Georgian National Museum): In '91, when we found this jaw, this was...a lot of scientists were quite skeptical about it, because it was very hard to imagine Georgia, Caucuses, to be on the map of the human evolution.

NARRATOR: Since then, Dmanisi has been put on the map of human evolution in a big way. The site has turned up a treasure trove of Homo erectus fossils. They've transformed our understanding of who left Africa and when. They showed that the first humans to leave Africa were much more primitive than Turkana Boy.

JORDÍ AGUSTÍ (Catalan Institute of Human Paleoecology and Social Evolution): People thought that the hominids that left Africa were very tall, like Turkana Boy, with big brains, advanced technology, and the Dmanisi proved the opposite.

NARRATOR: At four and a half feet tall, they were smaller than Turkana Boy, with more ape-like shoulders and a simple stone technology.

DAVID LORDKIPANIDZE: They are much more primitive. They have small brains. At the same time they were using very primitive stone tools.

NARRATOR: The next surprise came when they dated the site.

The ancient Dmanisi landscape has been built up, layer by layer, over millions of years. One-point-eighty-one million years ago, massive volcanic eruptions deposited a layer of ash. The fossils sat on top of this ash, so must have been slightly younger, around 1.8 million years old.

To the vast majority of scientists who believe that all our ancestors evolved in Africa, this was a stunning surprise. How had a small, primitive Homo erectus migrated to the Caucasus almost 2,000,000 years ago—long before Turkana Boy?

Scientists now accept that as soon as Homo erectus appeared on the savannas of Africa, they started to leave.

SUSAN ANTÓN: Suddenly, with the origin of Homo erectus we get this shift in body shape, and then boom! They're out of Africa right away.

NARRATOR: The Georgia fossils proved that Homo erectus left Africa much earlier than previously thought.

An even more provocative find shows the migration may have started even earlier. Five thousand miles from Africa: the island of Flores, Indonesia. In 2003, researchers made a discovery so strange nobody knew what to make of it.

They found the bones of a tiny human ancestor, just over three feet tall, even smaller than the Dmanisi fossils. They called this baffling new ancestor Homo floresiensis, and, because of its tiny size, nicknamed it "the Hobbit."

RALPH HOLLOWAY: This has created a tremendous amount of grief, because we're not really sure of what we're seeing here. The size of the Hobbit brain endocast is roughly 400 CCs.

NARRATOR: That's barely bigger than the brain of Lucy, the famous bipedal ape from 3,000,000 years ago.

BRIAN RICHMOND (The George Washington University): It's not just a small brain and a primitive looking face, but the foot's primitive, the hand's primitive, the leg is primitive.

SUSAN LARSON (Stony Brook University): The lower limb is very much like the Lucy skeleton. That was a big surprise.

NARRATOR: And in the cave where this primitive creature was found, they also uncovered stone tools, something Lucy never had.

JOHN SHEA: People have, for a long time, said, "You need a big brain to make stone tools." Ah, well, okay, if Homo floresiensis is making stone tools—this creature has a brain the size of an orange—clearly that equation's gone.

NARRATOR: Everything about these creatures is an enigma. Where did they come from and what were they?

BRIAN RICHMOND: Some researchers have argued that floresiensis is just a dwarfed population of modern people that suffered some kind of disease that caused them to both dwarf and have relatively small brains.

NARRATOR: But when scientists took a closer look, most saw no evidence of disease. The stone tools and the shape of the face moved the focus to our old friend, Homo erectus.

BRIAN RICHMOND: Some researchers also think that Homo floresiensis evolved from Homo erectus.

NARRATOR: But how did they get so small?

Something called "island dwarfism" may be the answer. Isolated on islands with limited food, large mammals sometimes shrink, over time. On Flores, there were once pygmy elephants the size of cows.

Could the same evolutionary pressure have acted on Homo erectus to produce the Hobbit? Or was this mysterious creature descended from an even more primitive ancestor?

SUSAN LARSON: So, perhaps we're sampling a period which is at the very beginning of the Homo lineage.

NARRATOR: So whatever the Hobbit was, perhaps its ancestors were the very first wave of migration out of Africa, some unknown creature: part bipedal ape like Lucy and part Homo erectus.

DANIEL LIEBERMAN: So, if that's the case, then what we see in Indonesia makes sense, it's kind of a body that existed before human bodies became more modern.

NARRATOR: What would push such primitive creatures out of Africa? A key driving force behind the migration was probably a climate shift which spread grasslands from Africa into Asia; and with the grasses went the game animals.

DANIEL LIEBERMAN: Animals are going to be moving out of Africa, and the hominids will just be keeping pace with those animals. After all, that's their livelihood.

NARRATOR: Of course, our ancestors didn't know they were leaving Africa. They just followed the animals they depended on through the Sinai up into the Middle East and beyond.

It's often been called an exodus, but it really wasn't like that.

JOHN SHEA: When people think of exodus they think of the Bible, or if they think of migration, they think of Europeans coming over here to the New World. It probably wasn't like any historical migration, this dispersal of humans out of Africa.

NARRATOR: The process was probably very, very slow, much like the spread of any other animal species into new territories.

SUSAN ANTÓN: You could imagine a group of Homo erectus moving their range a kilometer a year in one direction. And doing that continually over a long enough period of time, you can get the distance from Africa to Indonesia covered in say, 15,000 years.

NARRATOR: By a million years ago our ancestors had populated Asia from the Caucasus to Indonesia. And they were in Europe too, as a recent discovery in Spain has shown.

Homo erectus had conquered the Old World.

The fact that they made it so far with limited technology and relatively small brains makes them seem even more remarkable. And their longevity was astonishing. A few pockets of Homo erectus may have been still clinging on in Asia just 50,000 years ago. That's a span of two million years. Our own species has only been around for 200,000.

What was the secret of Homo erectus' success? The amazing finds at Dmanisi have given us one last clue.

One of the skulls belonged to an old man. His jaw bone revealed he had lost all his teeth, well before he died.

JORDÍ AGUSTÍ: That was a real surprise. It means that this individual survived two years without teeth.

NARRATOR: For an elder to have survived that long without teeth must mean that others in the group were feeding him, perhaps even chewing his food for him.

SARAH BLAFFER HRDY: I love this story. This was a remarkable testimony from the past about the quality of emotional life that may have characterized Homo erectus.

NARRATOR: Here is a tantalizing clue to what may be this ancestor's most important legacy: the instinct to look after each other. And it helps us imagine Turkana Boy's final day on Earth.

In the animators' scenario, he starts the day out on a hunt, but he has trouble keeping up with the hunting party. Why? The evidence from his skeleton is that he was sick and in pain at the time he died.

SUSAN ANTÓN: If we look at his lower jaw we can see right here, under the teeth that we've got a bit of an abscess and an infection. That kind of an infection could have entered the rest of his body, could have killed him.

NARRATOR: An abscess that ate away that much of his jawbone, would have been agonizing.

Turkana Boy is in so much pain he's unable to continue the hunt. Knowing he would be looked after, perhaps he returned to his campsite to find comfort among the females.

RICHARD LEAKEY: I think he was probably a miserable fellow in a lot of pain and very dependent on support and handouts. So it was a species that already felt that, "here's one of our weaklings that," you know, "we love and must protect and care for," to have got him that far.

NARRATOR: But however much they may have wanted to help him, there was nothing they could do about the infection that was probably spreading through his body.

VIKTOR DEAK: From what the evidence suggests, I've just always imagined him not knowing what was wrong with him, and there is a sadness to it. But ultimately, from that, comes this immortal being.

NARRATOR: His skeleton was so complete it is likely he died in water, which would have protected him.

MEAVE LEAKEY: It's very unusual to get a skeleton because normally these things are eaten by carnivores. And in this case, it seems that the boy's body was washed into a swamp, and so the carnivores never saw it, and never destroyed it. And it gradually decomposed, and as the rivers flooded, brought in more sediment, buried it. And you could see footprints of hippos that had walked all over the bones, and some of the ribs and things were standing vertically instead of lying flat on the ground.

You could sort of reconstruct the situation, and how the boy had... what had happened after he died and why he was complete. It was just, it really was, it was an amazing experience to see it.

NARRATOR: For almost 2,000,000 years, his bones were preserved by the earth. Their discovery opened a window for us on an unknown world, the world of the most successful human ancestor of all time: Homo erectus. They've revealed to us that mysterious moment when almost everything human was born: our bodies, our minds, our emotions.

Think of all we've become.

Trace the threads of our origins through the ancestors who went before. They all lead back to Turkana Boy and his kind, the first humans.

Watch Online-

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Friday, October 1, 2010

Monday, September 20, 2010

Friday, September 10, 2010

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Friday, August 20, 2010

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Sunday, August 1, 2010

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Saturday, July 10, 2010

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Sunday, June 20, 2010

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Monday, May 10, 2010

Saturday, May 1, 2010

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Thursday, April 1, 2010

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Monday, March 1, 2010

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Synopsis

Friday, January 29, 2010

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Monday, January 25, 2010

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Friday, January 22, 2010

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Last Human Standing

Monday, January 18, 2010

Birth of Humanity

Blog Archive

Search This Blog

Non-Believers Giving Aid