Kirsten Ircha 3/1/18
AP Biology E/F Even Current Event #17
AP Biology E/F Even Current Event #17
Citation:
Strickland, Ashley. “Human Fossil Discovery Rewrites History.” CNN, Cable News Network, 25
-intl/index.html.
The article, “Modern fossil discovery rewrites human history,” by Ashley Strickland interestingly explores the true past of the human race. The discovery has shown that the oldest modern human fossil has been found in Africa, dating back to 177,000 to 194,000 years ago. This fossil has been dated using three different techniques and the specimen is undeniable that of a Homo sapiens, rather than Neanderthal or some other early human ancestor. This is especially interesting as this explains migration pattern of early Homo sapiens. Furthermore, scientist have been able to clear up controversy over other modern human fossils, some 90,000 to 120,000 years old due to the findings. What has been found is that human migration may have started 50,000 years earlier than previously thought. This changes how scientist view the timeline of human migration. As Rolf Quam, study coauthor and anthropology professor at Binghamton University, explains this breakthrough, "There have been previous suggestions of a possible earlier migration, relying on both archaeological sites and ancient DNA studies, but now we have an actual human fossil that proves it." Further confirmation of this discovery comes from stone tools and other technologies from the archaeological site. The article describes these tools stating, “They were shaped in a unique way called the Levallois technique, where stones were flaked around the edges to achieve a sophisticated point used in hunting. The discovery of the tools along with the fossil in this location is the earliest known association between the two in the region.”
This article has a great impact on society. Due to the new discovery, scientist are now able to move forward and uncover history. In this way, scientist will be able to understand the “in between time,” or the historical time periods that are currently unclear. As Israel Hershkovitz, study author and professor in the department of anatomy and anthropology at Tel Aviv University, explains this advancement, "We have started excavating at two sites that were excavated in the past, the Skhul and Tabun caves, with the hope to find some hominins that will allow us to answer further questions relating to the late phase of human evolution.” This topic is of vital importance as the scientific community is constantly seeking answers about our evolutionary past. With the new excavations, the possibility of having a complete understanding of this issue continues to increase.
Many strengths and weaknesses exist throughout the text. To begin, the author uses a good amount of quotes from key scientist and individuals related to the discovery. This makes the article feel well supported by fact. Also, the grammar is perfect and the word choice is simple enough to be understood at many different educational levels. However, quite a few flaws can also be found in the article. Above all, the context of the article is somewhat unclear and confusing. This makes the audience have a weak base when beginning to read the article. Due to this, the remainder of the article is harder to fully comprehend. Also, the author uses many quotes that are taken directly from an e-mail. Although e-mails can be reliable, the article would have seemed more legitimate and supported if the quotes were taken directly from an actual conversation or interview. One of the more minor errors occurs towards the end of the piece. This is because the conclusion paragraph seems somewhat unrelated and abrupt. The piece would have seemed far more unified with a more complete ending. Due to these reasons, the main areas of improvement for the author are centered around better obtained sources, clearer background information, and a cleaner conclusion.
AP Bio
ReplyDeleteOlivia Scotti
3/2/18
Current Event # 17
Strickland, Ashley. “Human Fossil Discovery Rewrites History.” CNN, Cable News Network, 25
Jan. 2018, www.cnn.com/2018/01/25/health/oldest-modern-human-fossil-israel
-intl/index.html.
There were many aspects of Kirsten’s review written well. One part of her review that I felt she did particularly well was her description of how the discovery of these new fossils influences are knowledge of the past. For instance she states how “Furthermore, scientist have been able to clear up controversy over other modern human fossils, some 90,000 to 120,000 years old due to the findings.” Through this summary the reader is able to understand the main point of the article that is being reviewed. Another part of the review which was done well was the addition of quotes from research on this topic. For example, “As Rolf Quam, study coauthor and anthropology professor at Binghamton University, explains this breakthrough, "There have been previous suggestions of a possible earlier migration, relying on both archaeological sites and ancient DNA studies, but now we have an actual human fossil that proves it.”’ Through this the reader understands what research was conducted. This is also allows the reader to understand the tone of the article through direct quotes from the passage. Another part of the review that was done well was her ability to describe how this discovery is beneficial to the rest of the world. For instance she states, “ Due to the new discovery, scientist are now able to move forward and uncover history. In this way, scientist will be able to understand the “in between time,” or the historical time periods that are currently unclear.” This strengthened her review because the reader was able to see how research is useful for a lot of the population.
Although there were many parts of Kirsten’s review written well there were areas for improvement. One part of her review which could have been improved was her critique paragraph. Although she did mention the negatives and positives of the article I wish she had been less general when stating her positives and gone into more detail. Through adding more specific details about the positives of the article the reader would have had a better understanding of the article. Another part of the article that could have been improved was if she added more details about the new discoveries that could occur from this study. Also this would help strengthen her description of the research as a whole.
Overall, I felt Kirsten wrote a strong review of this article which the reader could easily understand. Her review was written clearly and smoothly which allowed the reader to learn about the topic more easily and understand the research conducted. I enjoyed reading this review because I learned more about how these fossils are so beneficial to our way of life. Overall, I liked how she described the research that was done and the effects on the present world. Through her discussion of this article the reader got a better grasp on the topic and the importance of this new research.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHannah Beldotti
ReplyDeleteAP Biology
Current Event #17
March 4, 2018
Strickland, Ashley. “Human Fossil Discovery Rewrites History.” CNN, Cable News Network, 25
Jan. 2018, www.cnn.com/2018/01/25/health/oldest-modern-human-fossil-israel
-intl/index.html.
For this week, I decided to read Kirsten Ircha’s current event review on Ashley Strickland’s, “Human Fossil Discovery Rewrites History.” Overall, Kirsten did a great job of reviewing this article. In her beginning paragraph, she wrote a complete, concise, summary that was able to inform the reader about the topic-at-hand. Also, when she introduced someone into the review, she explained who they were and their relevance. For example, she stated, “As Rolf Quam, study co author and anthropology professor at Binghamton University,” when explaining his opinion on the study. Another commendable aspect ot Kirsten’s review is her paragraph on the study’s impact on society. She states, “This topic is of vital importance as the scientific community is constantly seeking answers about our evolutionary past. With the new excavations, the possibility of having a complete understanding of this issue continues to increase,” to further elaborate on the preceding evidence she provided. Lastly, it was interesting to read what she thought the author’s strengths and weaknesses were throughout the article.
Although Kirsten wrote an excellent review on the article by Ashley Strickland, there were some aspects of it that could have been improved. For example, when she states, “This makes the article feel well supported by fact.” This sentence could have been worded differently to create a greater flow and cohesiveness in the paragraph. She could have said, “As a result, the article seemed more credible due to the fact that many details were supported by stated facts.” Despite some awkward sentence structure, this review was well-written and laudable.
I was initially intrigued by the title of the article she was reviewing. I learned a lot while reading this current event. For example, Kirsten states, “What has been found is that human migration may have started 50,000 years earlier than previously thought.” I also learned about the impact this topic can have on society. It’s interesting to read about what steps scientists are going to take to reveal more about our history.
Sarah Goodell
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Bio: Current Event #17
4 March, 2018
Strickland, Ashley. “Human Fossil Discovery Rewrites History.” CNN, Cable News Network, 25
Jan. 2018, www.cnn.com/2018/01/25/health/oldest-modern-human-fossil-israel
-intl/index.html.
This week, I read Kirsten’s review of Ashley Strickland’s article titled “Human Fossil Discovery Rewrites History” from CNN. There were three things in particular that Kirsten did well in her reflection on this article. Firstly, Kirsten provided her audience with an in-depth and understandable summary. By doing so, she set up the rest of her response and made sure that her readers were on the same page as her. Next, Kirsten did a great job using quotes, both from an anthropology professor and directly from the article itself. This allowed Kirsten to establish her credibility as a critic. Finally, Kirsten fully critiqued Ashley Strickland, the author of the original article, and provided her audience with an explanation as to how Strickland’s article succeeded and failed. In doing this, Kirsten prepared her readers for Strickland’s article and informed them of its flaws and drawbacks before they read the original piece.
Although Kirsten wrote a thoughtful, in-depth response to the original article, she could have improved upon two things in particular. Firstly, Kirsten could have expanded on the specific fossils that the archaeologists most recently discovered and where and how they were uncovered. If she had done this, Kirsten would have provided her audience with more information about the topic at hand. Secondly, Kirsten could have improved the overall flow of her paragraphs. This would have allowed Kirsten to better connect to her audience and get her points across more smoothly.
I chose Kirsten’s review because I am very interested in the topic of fossils and how archaeology can help us better understand our own history. Fossils are an essential component of understanding our past and how all species on Earth developed. It is also important for all people to understand that we never stop discovering and that our current beliefs can always be improved, expanded upon, or even disproven, as Kirsten shows here. These new findings have altered how scientists view our history and can completely change our future, as well.
Susie Goodell
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology
2/9/18
Strickland, Ashley. “Human Fossil Discovery Rewrites History.” CNN, Cable News
Network, 25 Jan. 2018, https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/25/health/oldest-modern-human-fossil-israel-intl/index.html
Current Event 18
For this current event, I decided to read my classmate Kirsten’s great review of the article “Human Fossil Discovery Rewrites History” by Ashley Strickland of CNN. This article discusses the discovery of the oldest modern human fossil in Africa from around 177,000 to 194,000 years ago. Kirsten included many quotes from scientists and professors, some of whom worked on the study. The quotes supported her statements and added more legitimacy to her review. She also explained the importance of the discovery very well. She made it clear how impactful the implications of the fossil will be on science and what we previously believed about human migration. Kirsten also analyzed the article really well. She provides many examples to back up her claims about the writing and the content. Explaining her ideas made her more credible.
Despite all of the great aspects of this review, Kirsten could have improved a few things. First, she could have described more of the details of the three different tests used to date and identify the fossil. If this information wasn’t provided in the article, she could have mentioned that because when she mentioned that there were three tests, it seemed like it needed more evidence to back it up. Secondly, she could have made her summary of the article flow better. It feels as if she just wrote facts without connecting and building a story around them. She could easily improve this aspect because all of the information is there, she merely has to explain a bit more.
I chose to read this article because the title caught my eye. This seemed like a huge discovery and I am interested in fossils and what they can tell us. Kirsten did a great job explaining the concept in terms that are easy for anyone to understand. This topic is extremely interesting as it is incredible that one fossil can have a huge impact on the world’s idea of human evolution and migration. We believed that we knew what happened in early human history, however, this fossil proved us wrong. Overall, Kirsten’s review was very well-written and I learned a lot about this topic.