The challenge of direct dating old human fossils
One senses a note of caution in the heading of the Nature article: 'The antiquity and primitive morphology of Australopithecus ramidus suggests that it represents a long-sought potential root species for the Hominidae'  The popular press has not reflected that caution.
Colin Groves (Australian National University) said in The Canberra Times: “…the missing link is no longer missing”.
Yet, every 'fossil watcher' knows that the individuals in that line-up change from time to time. That line-up has changed considerably in the last ten years. The particular line-up that Groves suggests is not the line-up accepted by all evolutionists. The fossils involved and the dates ascribed to them are subjectively determined and are constantly subject to change.
Responding to this letter, Wolde Gabriel et al admit that the starting point of their dating process involved 'biochronological comparisons' of fauna from other places.What is claimed to be one of the most sensational fossil discoveries involving human origins was made by Tim D.