Missing Link Skull found in Africa

[DrDawkinstein]

Bible Belt claims it as a mere test of faith

[Wacka]

Bible Belt claims it as a mere test of faith

 

I argue with the CREtins (creationists) on another board and you would be amazed at the weird stuff they come up with to explain away stuff like this.

[1billsfan]

Bible Belt claims it as a mere test of faith

 

 

 

 

It's too bad that "missing link" was about a million years late to the party.

 

[Tcali]

Bible Belt claims it as a mere test of faith

I've seen missing links many times--mostly working as bouncers in Buffalo bars in the 70s and 80s.

[Steely Dan]

Obviously this is BS because the earth is only 10,000 years old and thus something dated 200,000 years ago can't exist. NUH NUH NUH NUH NUH I CAN'T HEAR YOU NUH NUH NUH NUH.

[DrDawkinstein]

Obviously this is BS because the earth is only 10,000 years old and thus something dated 200,000 years ago can't exist. NUH NUH NUH NUH NUH I CAN'T HEAR YOU NUH NUH NUH NUH.

 

lol

 

http://imgur.com/x0r1u.png

[Steely Dan]

lol

 

http://imgur.com/x0r1u.png

 

 

And that's all I have to say 'bout that.

[Fan in San Diego]

I don't understand why the bible thumpers dont just embrace the concept that maybe god created evolution! Maybe 2000 years ago we weren't evolved enough to wrap our minds around that concept?

 

Some people in the middle east still are not evolved enough.

[Steely Dan]

I don't understand why the bible thumpers dont just embrace the concept that maybe god created evolution! Maybe 2000 years ago we weren't evolved enough to wrap our minds around that concept?

 

My father is a minister and he believes in evolution. I think the main reason for that is he's not a mental midget. Just sayin.

[stuckincincy]

I argue with the CREtins (creationists) on another board and you would be amazed at the weird stuff they come up with to explain away stuff like this.

 

I don't think much of this, either way.

 

You are 51 years old, yet in that short time, you know more than the collective thoughts of billions that preceded you. Neat.

 

The Book of Genisis preceded Darwin by...a bit...

 

1.2 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving

creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth

in the open firmament of heaven.

 

1.21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that

moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their

kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that

it was good.

 

Could be that God understands science, and evolution.

 

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,

Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

 

Hamlet, Act 1, scene 5

 

Points to ponder.

[/dev/null]

The Flying Spaghetti Monster put it there to fool us

[justnzane]

The Flying Spaghetti Monster put it there to fool us

Shut up you retarded fish frog, you are offending http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa222/Setian_Sins/God.jpg and his son http://mattstone.blogs.com/photos/christia...hparkjesus2.gif

[Tcali]

I don't understand why the bible thumpers dont just embrace the concept that maybe god created evolution! Maybe 2000 years ago we weren't evolved enough to wrap our minds around that concept?

 

Some people in the middle east still are not evolved enough.

The Pope even believes in evolution.

[Booster4324]

I don't think much of this, either way.

 

You are 51 years old, yet in that short time, you know more than the collective thoughts of billions that preceded you. Neat.

 

The Book of Genisis preceded Darwin by...a bit...

 

1.2 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving

creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth

in the open firmament of heaven.

 

1.21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that

moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their

kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that

it was good.

 

Could be that God understands science, and evolution.

 

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,

Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

 

Hamlet, Act 1, scene 5

 

Points to ponder.

 

Gee, from the oceans to everything that moves to avians. Well that is clearly false. I mean dinosaurs were reptiles. Science has known this for going on two centuries...

[stuckincincy]

I don't think much of this, either way.

 

You are 51 years old, yet in that short time, you know more than the collective thoughts of billions that preceded you. Neat.

 

The Book of Genisis preceded Darwin by...a bit...

 

1.2 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving

creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth

in the open firmament of heaven.

 

1.21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that

moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their

kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that

it was good.

 

Could be that God understands science, and evolution.

 

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,

Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

 

Hamlet, Act 1, scene 5

 

Points to ponder.

 

 

My apology to you, Wacka. My opening words were a rudeness to you.

 

 

stuck

[BillsWatch]

Bible Belt claims it as a mere test of faith

 

What is SKOOBY going to do without his skull?

[Sketch Soland]

"Not noted in the report was the happenstance finding that this proto homo sapien species used ivory instead of wood to carve their chess pieces...."

[Boom Jam]

Bible Belt claims it as a mere test of faith

 

Science is going to be hard pressed to complete the evolutionary lineage between neanderthal man and modern humans, and that's because there isn't one.

[Steely Dan]

What is SKOOBY going to do without his skull?

 

 

"Not noted in the report was the happenstance finding that this proto homo sapien species used ivory instead of wood to carve their chess pieces...."

 

I can't believe you wasted the time to actually type that.

[Boom Jam]

 

 

It's too bad that "missing link" was about a million years late to the party.

 

 

Bigfoot mystery solved.

[Wacka]

Science is going to be hard pressed to complete the evolutionary lineage between neanderthal man and modern humans, and that's because there isn't one.

 

 

Mafia union goons?

[John Adams]

Science is going to be hard pressed to complete the evolutionary lineage between neanderthal man and modern humans, and that's because there isn't one.

 

So? Lots of species have died out at evolutionary dead ends.

[Typical TBD Guy]

Science is going to be hard pressed to complete the evolutionary lineage between neanderthal man and modern humans, and that's because there isn't one.

 

The article has nothing to do with Neanderthals. It was about finding the link between Homo erectus and modern humans. And what makes you certain there is no link? Are you a credible anthropologist or just another Bible thumper?

[Beerball]

So? Lots of species have died out at evolutionary dead ends.

And others continued even though they were dead ends. Take Steely Dan for instance.

[Boom Jam]

The article has nothing to do with Neanderthals. It was about finding the link between Homo erectus and modern humans. And what makes you certain there is no link? Are you a credible anthropologist or just another Bible thumper?

 

Bible thumper? No, I'm one of the few around here who believes the universe is teaming with life, and intelligent life at that. I firmly believe that neanderthal man is the 'evolutionary' descendant of homo erectus. Do I believe that modern humans 'evolved' from homo erectus? No. I think it would have taken too many random cosmic rays to the gonads to go from homo erectus to us. So how did we become modern humans? I haven't the slightest clue yet, but I am positive we didn't 'evolve' from homo erectus. Something else happened along the way. What exactly happened? Your guess is as good as mine, but there are some intriguing theories out there.

[Boom Jam]

So? Lots of species have died out at evolutionary dead ends.

 

Haven't you ever found it interesting that neanderthal man 'died out' right at the same time that cro-magnon man started to get rolling?

[Boom Jam]

Mafia union goons?

 

Obama speech writers too:

 

"We uphold our fundamental principles and values not just because we choose to, but because we swear to -- not because they feel good, but because they help keep us safe."

 

How EFFing delusional can one be?

[BillsWatch]

Haven't you ever found it interesting that neanderthal man 'died out' right at the same time that cro-magnon man started to get rolling?

 

Anthropological evidence shows some coexisting for a period before rapid drop in findings of fossils.

 

Reminds me of American Indians in US - twp populations with one with technology advancements and a new disease other group could not handle.

[/dev/null]

Here's another Missing Link skull

 

This one is the missing link between humans and Marshawn "Beast Mode" Lynch

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...th-picture.html

[justnzane]

Here's another Missing Link skull

 

This one is the missing link between humans and Marshawn "Beast Mode" Lynch

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...th-picture.html

[Fan in San Diego]

Haven't you ever found it interesting that neanderthal man 'died out' right at the same time that cro-magnon man started to get rolling?

 

I think they mated and merged and thats why the fossils record dribbled out. Havn't you ever seen someone every now and then who's head and eyebrows look like a neaderthal?

[Cornerville]

The article has nothing to do with Neanderthals. It was about finding the link between Homo erectus and modern humans. And what makes you certain there is no link? Are you a credible anthropologist or just another Bible thumper?

 

 

So wait, only 'Bible Thumpers' have an agenda...science does not?

Ah I get it now

[Dan]

Bible thumper? No, I'm one of the few around here who believes the universe is teaming with life, and intelligent life at that. I firmly believe that neanderthal man is the 'evolutionary' descendant of homo erectus. Do I believe that modern humans 'evolved' from homo erectus? No. I think it would have taken too many random cosmic rays to the gonads to go from homo erectus to us. So how did we become modern humans? I haven't the slightest clue yet, but I am positive we didn't 'evolve' from homo erectus. Something else happened along the way. What exactly happened? Your guess is as good as mine, but there are some intriguing theories out there.

You gotta love arguments like this. So you have no clue what happened, yet you're positive that you're right? Brilliant.

[Hazed and Amuzed]

So wait, only 'Bible Thumpers' have an agenda...science does not?

Ah I get it now

 

 

I don't want to get started in this thread so I won't elaborate but this is the best post here. When it comes to proving their point Scientists and Bible thumpers are interchangeable, neither want to hear what the other has to say.

 

And no I am not a bible thumper just someone who is sick of the thumpers and nerds fighting about something neither can prove.

[billsfan72]

A little girl asked her mother: 'How did the human race appear?' The mother answered, 'God made Adam and Eve; they had children; and so was all mankind made.'

Two days later the girl asked her father the same question. The father answered, 'Many years ago there were monkeys from which the human race evolved.'

 

The confused girl returned to her mother and said, 'Mom, how is it possible that you told me the human race was created by God, and Dad said they developed from monkeys?

 

The mother answered, 'Well, Dear, it is very simple. I told you about my side of the family, and your father told you about his.'

[Typical TBD Guy]

So wait, only 'Bible Thumpers' have an agenda...science does not?

Ah I get it now

 

Did I ever say such a thing? Of course science has an agenda (individual glory, research funding, lifetime job security, etc...), but it also has its own built-in system of "checks and balances" to make sure it's not making sh-- up as it goes along (confines of the scientific method, inductive proof, deductive logic, rigorous peer review, etc...). Comparing the two agendas is like comparing apples and oranges.

[woolley]

You gotta love arguments like this. So you have no clue what happened, yet you're positive that you're right? Brilliant.

 

???

 

If you lack the answer to a question, does that mean that you must/may not rule out any of the possible answers in play?

[woolley]

Did I ever say such a thing? Of course science has an agenda (individual glory, research funding, lifetime job security, etc...), but it also has its own built-in system of "checks and balances" to make sure it's not making sh-- up as it goes along (confines of the scientific method, inductive proof, deductive logic, rigorous peer review, etc...). Comparing the two agendas is like comparing apples and oranges.

 

Science doesn't have an agenda, it's a methodology.

 

I think, at a fundamental level, the agendas of people are quite similar, i.e. intellectual and psychologial satisfaction. Once you design your framework things diverge.

[Boom Jam]

You gotta love arguments like this. So you have no clue what happened, yet you're positive that you're right? Brilliant.

 

You gotta love douchebags like this. So you have no opinion on what happened, yet you're posting in this thread anyway right? Brilliant.

[Dan]

???

If you lack the answer to a question, does that mean that you must/may not rule out any of the possible answers in play?

You gotta love douchebags like this. So you have no opinion on what happened, yet you're posting in this thread anyway right? Brilliant.

The point I was attempting to make, that apparently was missed, is quite simple. If you state that you have no clue as to what happened, how can you say that you're positive about anything? "I don't know what the answer is, but based upon this evidence or that, I think we evolved from H. erectus."; is a much more reasonable argument.

 

As for my opinion, it's largely irrelevant. I'm not an anthropologist, nor did I sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night. So, typically I defer to the experts in the field as opposed to making an unsupported claim and assuring everyone that I'm absolutely positive that's the right answer. However, you asked for my opinion, so I'll provide it.

 

There are currently 2 primary theories on human evolution - Modern H. sapiens evolved from small, regional populations throughout Africa, Europe and Asia and all modern humans evolved in parallel from these earlier populations. The second theory proposes that modern H. sapiens evolved from a small, isolated population in Africa. And as this population expanded it outcompeted all early hominid species. As far as I know, the fossil record and mitochondrial DNA studies best support the later theory. Hence, I would be inclined to cite that theory as most plausible, until evidence is discovered or presented to the contrary.

 

As for the suggestion that modern H. sapiens evolved from H. erectus, well that's largely speculation at best. If you prefer the multiregional theory of parallel evolution; then I think you could make an argument that H. erectus could have evolved further. However, if the "out of Africa" theory is more accurate, then it's less likely that H. erectus further evolved into H. sapiens. Given my preference for the later theory, I'm currently of the opinion that H. erectus was an evolutionary deadend. But, again, I would argue that much still remains to be learned about human evolution and therefore much remains to be rewritten.