|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Racial Evolution 101 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
redwolf Member (Idle past 5791 days) Posts: 185 From: alexandria va usa Joined: |
>>I don't know what you mean by "Basically, the further back you go, the worse it gets" unless you are saying that the further you go back in time the less modern the specimens look (doh!) or that your biases and prejudices are showing.
The neanderthal is basically a protohuman of some sort; homo erectus is basically an ape. Everything else prior to home erectus are less developed apes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: Neanders and humans lived at the same time yet did not share mitochondrial DNA. If they were as humans there should be no difference in mitochondrial DNA, other than the differences seen within human populations today. They were separate species and did not interbreed, at least according to the DNA recovered so far. How can they be us, and yet not be us? If we are their direct descendants then the differences in mitDNA shouldn't be as numerous as what we find, especially given the fact that humans and neanders were alive at the same time. Also, how do you decide what is an ape and what is a human? What measurements or criteria do you use?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
this post by redwolf (#60) is verbatim from
http://www.bearfabrique.org/evorants/neander_Matternes.html either redwolf is ted holden or he is plagarizing ted's 'work' or he just doesn't know to properly credit stuff to those who do it. AND neanders may have been around until 30,000 years ago http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/neand.htm
Neanderthals are known from Europe and western Asia from about 200,000 years to about 30,000 years ago, when they disappeared from the fossil record and were replaced in Europe by anatomically modern forms. How that all affects human evolution still escapes me, as this is consistent with the evolutionary hominid tree. It's like saying "WOW there were two people in the room, how did they get there?" enjoy. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
The neanderthal is basically a protohuman of some sort; homo erectus is basically an ape. Everything else prior to home erectus are less developed apes. opinion, and that's all. The line between human and hominid and between hominid and ape is blurred by ages, no question. But I look at that picture of Homo erectus and see a human:
And you still haven't answered about the family tree shown on two different sites above(http://EvC Forum: Racial Evolution 101) we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SRO2  Inactive Member |
I GOT IT FIRST! The human is the one with the tits!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminAsgara Administrator (Idle past 2302 days) Posts: 2073 From: The Universe Joined: |
Red, you have been called on possibly posting items not your own. If you ARE Ted Holden as Raz and Sylas believe, you might want to admit it here. If you do not want to admit to a real persona on a web forum you should cite your source as you would if you were copying someone else's work.
If you are NOT Holden you must cite your source http://www.bearfabrique.org/evorants/neander_Matternes.html Plagarizing is not only dishonest and cheating, but also against Forum Guidelines. It can be grounds for suspension. AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SRO2  Inactive Member |
There should be an exclusion. You don't have to cite the source if it is from a government funded one. For example, my aircraft carrier dimensions I posted came from a U.S. Navy public domain where there is NOT a source given. As tax payers, that is OUR information that we paid for and it belongs to us as a whole (sort of like, if you as a tax payer, were to ask me to provide information about the space shuttle, I would be obliged to provide it unless I felt I couldn't because it was in the interest of national security or company proprietary information)...government information that is of public domain doesn't require a source to be provided other than it's from the government.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminAsgara Administrator (Idle past 2302 days) Posts: 2073 From: The Universe Joined: |
Thanks for the clarification Rocket.
It is still good debating manners to list where your info comes from, even if it IS public domain info. AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
This is a weak point, Rocket. It is dishonest to present something as your own writing when it isn't, regardless of whether you paid for the writing. There are exceptions, of course, but they don't extend to debates of the sort we have here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SRO2  Inactive Member |
How is it a weak point? If it's a government document it usually cites a department...not a sole source...what can anybody do about that? I already said it should be referenced back to a government source..and thats not even necessary...Lets use an example; "A space Shuttle Main Engine High Pressure Fuel Turbopump weighs approximately 500 lbs."
...now that information is available through the library of congress....but you have to fill out requests to get engineering drawings of the pump that you don't have a chance in hell of finding the actual weight in a bug note out of 30 engineering pages of drawings and there are dozens of engineering releases pending revisions by dozens of engineers...now how the FUCK are you ever going to find outthe actual source of one of those drawings that changed the weight?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
What they want is the website the information comes from? what did you use to find the information ...
we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
You trace it back as far as you conveniently can and cite that. You don't simply copy the material without mentioning that you didn't write it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SRO2  Inactive Member |
"I think I've expressed my own views about this adequately in other threads. My only request here would be that anyone considering bringing up the story of Lot and the city of Sodom please review a previous thread starting with this message. You will note that the Sodom story is not adequate to make any case that homosexuality is immoral. You will also note that the discussion left many hurt feelings and apparently resulted in the exit of one or two creo members."
You have ten minutes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
And your point is?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SRO2  Inactive Member |
Thank you. You are dismissed.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024