TL;DR: They found some fossils in Greece and Bulgaria, the jaws and teeth of which suggest they belonged to an evolutionary ancestor of Homo sapiens sapiens, and which seem to be older than any other such fossil records.
"If this status is confirmed by additional fossil evidence, Graecopithecus would be the oldest known hominin..." where hominin is defined in the paper to mean "humans and their non-ape ancestors".
There are roughly about 200 Neanderthal/Denisovan/older skeletons (whole or partially) found. Or, according to 'A short history of nearly everything', the amount of bones of our ancient ancestors fit in the back of a small pickup truck.
Let that sink in: over 4 million years of human history, and all remains we have found fit in the back of a pickup truck.
Scientists draw conclusions based on evidence found, but truth is, we really don't know that much about our ancestors. The vast majority of bones don't fossilize and just decay. You can excavate all you want, but it takes very specific circumstances for organic material to be preserved over a course of hundreds of thousands or even millions of years. Most of it is just gone.
Add that that humans millions years ago were not in billions as today. They were actually in very small numbers, like tens of thousands on the entire planet.
Ive wondered if over a very long period of time it might be possible for our descendants to build a simulation which can aproximate the entropy difference b/w now and our past on earth. Or if such calculations would be forever practically impossible, even given enormous power, i.e. a computer harnessing the power of the sun
You could argue the contrary. When some construction is going on in Europe, if something is found in the ground, there is a high chance it will result in a scientific excavation. When construction goes on in Africa (when it even does) I doubt the project will be interrupted often to call scientists. So there should be a selection bias toward developped countries in finding remains in the ground.
Isn't that exactly the point the parent comment made? I think you misinterpreted his "excavation" (as in archeological excavation) as "excavation for the purpose of construction". But maybe I am the one who misunderstood.
But what I mean is slightly different. That the fact that we find these rare bones in Europe but not in Africa may have more to do with less scientific excavations going on in Africa than with the species not being present in Africa at that period.
"If this status is confirmed by additional fossil evidence, Graecopithecus would be the oldest known hominin..." where hominin is defined in the paper to mean "humans and their non-ape ancestors".
EDIT: phrasing and clarity.