Science

Showers (AM and PM) 6° London Hi 10°C / Lo 6°C

New techniques prove mammoths more recent than first thought

By John von Radowitz, Press Association

Woolly mammoths were roaming the Shropshire countryside thousands of years after they were thought to be extinct, research suggests.

Scientists have re-examined skeletons of one adult male and at least four juvenile mammoths unearthed from Condover, Shropshire, in 1986.

New techniques developed in the last 20 years allowed them to make a more accurate estimate of the age of the fossils.

The findings indicate that woolly mammoths lived in Britain as recently as 14,000 years ago - 7,000 years after they were believed to have died out.

Professor Adrian Lister, from the Natural History Museum in London, who carried out the research, said: "Mammoths are conventionally believed to have become extinct in north-western Europe about 21,000 years ago during the main ice advance, known as the Last Glacial Maximum.

"Our new radiocarbon dating of the Condover mammoths changes that, by showing that mammoths returned to Britain and survived until around 14,000 years ago."

The Shropshire fossils are the last record of mammoths living in north-west Europe.

They suggests that climate change wiped out the woolly mammoth in Europe rather than human hunters.

"The new dates of the mammoths' last appearance correlate very closely in time to climate changes when the open grassy habitat of the Ice Age was taken over by advancing forests, which provides a likely explanation for their disappearance," said Prof Lister.

"There were humans around during the time of the Condover mammoths, but no evidence of significant mammoth hunting."

The research is published today in the Geological Journal.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

DON'T TELL THE RELIGIOUS NUTTERS
[info]georgesign wrote:
Thursday, 18 June 2009 at 07:46 am (UTC)
They will be choking on their corn-flakes. Not only are they certain that God hears them and that Jesus lives but that the world only started 6000 years ago. So how can this article be true?
Re: DON'T TELL THE RELIGIOUS NUTTERS
[info]andy_arcane wrote:
Thursday, 18 June 2009 at 11:34 am (UTC)
I doubt the religious young-Earhters will be too bothered.

Their fingers and hands have evolved to the perfect size for stopping up their ears and covering their eyes when there are facts and evidence rubbishing their delusions to be seen and heard.
Re: DON'T TELL THE RELIGIOUS NUTTERS
[info]fallenpedant wrote:
Thursday, 18 June 2009 at 12:40 pm (UTC)
More likely, they'll question the basis / methodology of radio carbon dating.
Re: DON'T TELL THE RELIGIOUS NUTTERS
[info]bepositiveman wrote:
Thursday, 18 June 2009 at 07:19 pm (UTC)
Hang on there matey. Don't be so ready to put everyone who believes that God hears and Jesus lives in the same group as the young earthers, even if vice versa is true.
Re: DON'T TELL THE RELIGIOUS NUTTERS
[info]rexxxxxxxx wrote:
Thursday, 25 June 2009 at 06:44 pm (UTC)
enlighten me as to an ancient script written less than 200 ad that mentioned jesus
I love the concept of god and his son as read in the bible to guide our lives. but i dont see that as being incompatiple with science
Re: DON'T TELL THE RELIGIOUS NUTTERS
[info]bepositiveman wrote:
Thursday, 25 June 2009 at 07:19 pm (UTC)
Assuming you mean apart from the many and various scripts of Early Church origin, how about Josephus Antiquities, in the first paragraph of book 20, chapter 9? Pretty well accepted by all scholars as authentic.
But I'm not sure what you're trying to prove.

I don't see any incompatibility with science either, that's why I said don't put everyone in the same subset.
Re: DON'T TELL THE RELIGIOUS NUTTERS
[info]rexxxxxxxx wrote:
Thursday, 25 June 2009 at 08:16 pm (UTC)
I love you
A Comment
[info]khalid_haija wrote:
Friday, 19 June 2009 at 06:24 am (UTC)
A very brief article! Why the writers did not give the readers some informations about this well known mammal: the mammoth??

Most popular